



Class 




Book 


: 


PRESENTTBD BY^ 





u 

AN 

ORIGINAL DRAUGHT 

OF THE 

PRIMITIVE CHURCH, 

IN ANSWER TO A 

DISCOURSE, 

ENTLITED 

AN ENQUIRY INTO THE CONSTITUTION, DISCIPLINE, UNITY 

AND WORSHIP, OF THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, THAT 

PLOURISHED WITHIN THE FIRST THREE 

HUNDRED YEARS AFTER CHRIST. 

By Lord Chancellor King. 



BY A PRESBYTER OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 



FIRST AMERICAN EDITION. 



COLUMBUS, OHIO: 
PUBLISHED BY ISAAC N. WHITING, 

HIGH-STREET. 
1833. 



Bf3l65 



Jenkins and Glover, Printers. 



RECOMMENDATIONS. 

"Slater's Original Draught of the Primitive Church," is 
one of the standard books, in the Protestant Episcopal 
Church. Its circulation among the members of that Church 
will be very useful; and we therefore most heartily wish 
success to the enterprise of its republication in this country, 

WILLIAM WHITE, D. D. 
Bishop of the Prot. Epis. Church in the State of Pennsyl- 
vania. 

HENRY U. ONDERDONK, D. D. 
Assistant Bishop of the Prot. Epis, Church in the State of 
Pennsylvania, 

My sentiments fully accord with those of Bishops White 
and Onderdonk above. 

LEVI S. IVES, D. D. 
Bishop of the Prot, Epis, Church in the State of N. Carolina* 

We the subscribers entirely concur in the above recom- 
mendations. 

THOMAS WRIGHT, 
Rector of St, Luke's Church, Salisbury, and Christ Church, 
Rowan County. North Carolina, 

JAMES ABERCROMBIE, D. D. 
Senior Assistant Minister of the United Churches of Christ, 
and St. Peter's, Philadelphia, 

BIRD WILSON, D. D. 
Professor of Systematic Divinity in the General Theologica I 
Seminary of the Prot, Epis, Church in the United States* 
JYew York. 

WILLIAM H. De LANCY, D. D. 
Provost of the University of Pennsylvania. 

WILLIAM COOPER MEAD, D. D. 
Rector of Trinity Church, Southwark, Philadelphia. 



IV RECOMMENDATIONS. 

EDWARD RUTLEDGE, 

Assistant Professor of Moral Philosophy in the University 
of Pennsylvania, 

JAMES MONTGOMERY, D. D. 
Rector of Si Stephen's Church, Philadelphia. 

PETER VAN PELT, Jim. 
Secretary of the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of 
the Prot. Epis. Church in the U. States, Philadelphia. 
The republication of "Slater's Original Draught," I con- 
sider to be one of the best means of directing aright the hon- 
est enquirer for the truth, in the important subject of the 
Constitution of the Christian Ministry, in the first and purest 
ages of the Gospel. Most sincerely, therefore, do I recom- 
mend it to general patronage. 

BENJAMIN T. ONDERDONK, D. D. 

Bishop of the Prot. Epis. Church in the State of New York. 

We fully accord with the foregoing recommendation of 
Bishop Onderdonk. 

JONATHAN W. WAINWRIGHT, D. D. 
Rector of Grace Church, New York. 

THOMAS LYELL, D. D. 
Rector of Christ Church, New York. 

HENRY ANTHON, 
An Assistant Minister of Trinity Church, New York. 

WILLIAM CREIGHTON, D. D. 
Rector of St. Mark's Church, New York. 

WILLIAM R. WHITTINGHAM, 
Rector of St. Luke's Church, New York. 

I consider "Slater's Original Draught" as one of the 
ablest delineations of the Primitive Christian Church and 
its Ministry, that has been given to the public. Its repub- 
lication cannot fail to advance the cause of primitive truth 
and order. 

THOMAS CHURCH BROWNELL, D. D. LL. D. 
Bishop of the Prot. Epis. Church in the State of Connecticut 



RECOMMENDATIONS. 

The republication of "Slater's Original Draught," in an- 
swer to Lord Chancellor King's book, to which he never 
replied, and by which he is said to have been convinced, I 
regard as a measure promising great benefit to the Church, 
and an enterprise worthy of all commendation. 

GEORGE W. DOANE, 

Bishop of the Prot. Epis. Church in the State of New Jersey. 

I rejoice to see proposals for an American edition of "Sla- 
ter's Original Draught." The English editions are all old 
and nearly out of print. The work is a master piece, and 
one of the best correctives of some of the prevailing errors 
on the subject of which it treats. 

WILLIAM CROSWELL, 
Hector of Christ Church, Boston. 

We heartily concur in the several recommendations of 
"Slater's Original Draught," and shall be glad to see it in 
the American press. 

HARRY CROSWELL, D. D. 
Rector of Trinity Church, JS r ew Haven. 

WILLIAM E. WYATT, D. D. 
Rector of St. PauVs Church, Baltimore. 

Although I have never read "Slater's Original Draught 
of the Primitive Church," yet from the high reputation 
which it has lung enjoyed as a work containing an unan- 
swerable refutation of the errors of Lord King in relation to 
the subject of which it treats, I should hail its publication in 
this country, as an event favorable to the interests of primi- 
tive truth and order. 

JOHN P. K: HENSHAW, D. D. 
Red >r of Si. Peter's Church, Baltimore. 

I should be glad to see an American edition of "Slater's 
Original Draught of the Primitive Church," and do not 
doubt that its circulation in the West will be highly profit- 
able, 

CHARLES P. M'lLVATNE, D. D. 
Bishop of the Prot. Epis. Church in the State of Ohio. 



CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER I. p. 1. 

An Introduction. The Primitive notion of a particular Church 
considered. The Enquirer asserts a Congregational form of it. His 
first authority from Irenaeus for it, proves nothing to his purpose. His 
second is a precarious construction of Dionysius Alexandrinus' words, 
and inconsistent with that father's account of his own Church of Alex- 
andria, His third and last authority from Tertullian is rather a mere 
oversight, than an argument. His observation of the wold Church* 
rarely used for a collection of Churches, shewn to be neither material 
nor just. He divides Church members and ministers aright ; but in the 
respective offices he assigns them, he vastly differs from the ancients. 
His misapprehension of the different powers conferred by the Apostles 
on the several Elders they ordained, a main ground for his mistake ; yet 
easy to be rectified by some observations of his own 7 if applied to it. 
But to carry on that mistake, he styles the single Bishop of any Church 
the Supreme Bhhop of it, contrary to the language of all antiquity ^ 
And thereby defeats that catholic test of distinction between truth and 
heresy of old, viz. the Apostolical Bishop in every true Church of 
Christ. The artful use he makes of the several titles of. his Supreme 
Bishop. 

CHAPTER II. p. 24: 
A Primitive Diocese called a Church, in the singular number, is no 
proof of the congregational form of it; it was apparently so in latter 
ages, when a plurality of congregations was notorious; nay. Churches, 
in the plural, were ofien attributed to a single Diocese by the ancients 
though the Enquirer overlooked it. His popular argument from a 
primitive Diocese, and a modern English Parish called by the common 
name of UapoiKia considered at large, and refuted. The Congregational 
notion inconsistent with the numbers of believers in Jerusalem, which 
Church, though the original platform of Christian Churches, the Enqui- 
rer passes over, whilst he particularly considered otherChurches. Ter- 
tullian, Eusebius, and Optatus' testimony in this case. St. Gregory's 
Church in Neocsesarea a pregnant instance against the Enquiry. Justin 



VIII CONTENTS. 

Martyr misrepresented in the Enquiry. His true meaning cleared. The 
like of several passages in St. Ignatius. A primitive Bishop could 
assign distinct places, and Presbyters to officiate in them within his 
own Diocese, confessed bj the Enquirer. St. Ignatius' Udv^wv hu 7o 
avrd avviXivais and his Mia Sirjaig are severally accounted for. And a]so 
his one Altar in a Diocese. The Enquirer's mistake about St. Cyp- 
rian's Diocese communicating with him all at once. And that all 
received at the Bishop's hands only in Tertullian's time. And that 
the Bishop alone baptized all. And that he alcne took a personal care 
for all in want or distress. And that those common phrases before the 
Church, in presence of the people and the \lke 1 implied the presence of 
every individual at once. Bishops might write letters in the name of 
their people, and not have all present . A mistake again, about the 
Bishop of Smyrna's personal knowledge of all his Diocese. And of the 
Diocese of Magnesia having but one Church in it. The great absurdity 
of affirming the See of Antioch to have but one congregation in it. 
The like of the See of Rome. And of the See of Carthage. And of 
that of Alexandria. Some short remarks on BisboDS placed in villages 

CHAPTER III. p. 92. . 

The sense of antiquity about several parts of the Episcopal charge, 
compared with that of the Enquirer's. The primitive manner of pla- 
cing a Bishop in a vacant See, misrepresented in the Enquiry. Origi- 
nal right not distinguished from some particular practice in that matter. 
Holy Scripture places the entire power of ordinuion in the persons of 
the governors of the Church. The Apostles used that power accord- 
ingly ; and so did those secondary'Apostles St. Paul and St. Barnabas. 
The true construction of Acts, 14, 23. can mean nothing else. The 
like authority was personally invested in Timothy and Titus. Those 
texts, 1 Tim. 3, 2, 10. and Tir. 1, 16. that Bishops and Deacons nusH 
be first proved and found blameless, imply no popular election in them ; 
St. Paul's instructions about it shew his meaning to be otherwise, nor 
does the nature of the qualifications for the ministry agree with it, or the 
Enquirer's impartial opinion in the case. Primitive antiquity shews 
the like practice after the Apostles' times. Where the people were 
present at the consecration of their Bishop, the Synod chose the person, 
and all the people's part in it was to give their testimony of his life and 
conversation. St Cyprian's account of the African Synod's practice 
in that case, proves quite the contrary to what the Enquiry quotes it for; 
and that chiefly by the misconstruction of the word suffrage in making 



CONTENTS. IX? 

it equal to a judicial or authoritative act. St. Cyprian's notion of the 
word suffrage cleared at large. St. Clemens' phrase YwevSoK^darjs t%q 
'EKKXrjaias Ttdtnjg directly answers to it, and neither one noi the other 
imply any power or authority in them. The example of Alexander's 
promotion to the See of Jerusalem, a nd that of Fabianus to the See 
of Rome, urged by the Enquirer for proof of popular elections, and 
both of them shewn to be of a very different nature. The other two 
of Cornelius and St. Cyprian have only the mistake of the word suf- 
frage to support them. Some provinces may have obliged themselves 
to join the people's approbation to the Episcopal authority in oidina- 
tions, and there it became a duty for the time, but was repealable, be- 
cause prudential only, and obliged no farther, as the Enquirer owns, 
than amongst themselves. To ordain in presence and cognizance of 
the people, for better knowledge of the candidates, was wise in the 
ancienti, and is continued in the Church of England still. The case 
of St. Matthias and the seven Deacons considered ; and neither one 
nor the other countenance a popular election of Pastors in % the Church, 

CHAPTER IV. p. 141. 
The Enquirer's impartiality a little doubtful in this cause. He as- 
serts equality of order in Bishop and Presbyter. A ruling power in the 
Presbyter given for one instance of that equality, and yet a palpable 
inequality of it included in his definition of a Presbyter. That a 
Presbyter had not an inherent right in his orders to perform the whole 
office of a Bishop, proved from the judgment of antiquity, concerning 
the holy rite of advancing a Presbyter to the station of a Bishop. That 
judgment of theirs specified in six or seven instances of it, all importing 
the collation of a different order by it. And further, the Presbyter so 
advanced could perform such clerical offices then, as he could not do 
before; what Tertullian's meaning is of approved Elders presiding, 
and Firmilian's of his majoresnatu; neither one nor the other refer 
to the presidency of the Presbyters with their Bishops in the private 
consistories, as co-partners with them in the executive part of the Ec- 
clesiastical Court. Much less do Firmilian's words imply a power of 
ordination in the Presbyters, which they are quoted for; nor yet that 
text, 1 Tim .4. 14. with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery. 
What Rogatianus and Numidicus did by St. Cyprian's order, no proof 
of a powei of excommunication in his Presbyters. Much less do the 
quotations from his leUers to the Presbyters and Deacons proye they 
could do all their Bishops could do. Nor does the letter of the Roman 



X CONTENTS. 

Presbyters to those at Carthage imply any such thing. To prove that 
Presbyters could confirm, the Enquirer makes that holy office a mere 
part or appendix of Baptism, and the very same with absolution of 
penitents. The invalidity of his proof for it, and the inconsistency of 
the thing itself, and the true nature of primitive confirmation explain- 
ed, and appropriated to the Bishop alone. The Enquirer's second 
general reason for equality of order, from identity of title or appella- 
tions, shewn to be of no force, and a reason assigned why clerical titles 
were so indifferently used all the Apostles' times, and the title of Bish- 
op so peculiarly appropriated afterwards. His third general reason, 
viz. that the ancients expressly affirm there were but two orders in the 
Church, holds good in none of the three authorities quoted fcr it. That 
of Clemens Romanus examined, and that of Irenseus; together with 
the sacred text, Isa. 60. 17. used by them both, and lastly, that of 
Clemens Alexandrinus. The Enquirer affirms St. Cyprian calls his 
Presbyters his colleagues; his mistake shewn. His singular reason fo r 
the number of Presbyters in many particular primitive Churches . The 
divine and apostolical institution of Bishops, Priests and Deacons in 
the Church observed from Clemens Alexandrinus' account of St* John 
the Apostle's solemn ordinations. 

CHAPTER V. p. 202. 

Deacons by a mistaken passage in. St. Ignatius, styled Deacons of 
the meats and cups. That father clears them of that title, and styles 
them ministers of the Church of God. The Enquirer, to strengthen 
his notion of the equal orders of Bishop and Presbyter, supposes the 
same in Deacons and sub-Deacons, which is a wide mistake, and 
against matter of fact. His account of the primitive manner of ordain- 
ing Presbyters. It is no pattern of the Catholic practice then, though 
represented as such, by misquoting St. Cyprian for it. What St, Cy- 
prian did in that matter, was wholly grounded on a private purpose of 
his own, and that proved at large, both from competent and impartial 
judges, and from himself too. The primitive qualifications for holy 
orders, required and provided for by the constitution of the Church of 
England. Some remarks upon the manner of the ministers' mainte- 
nance in the primitive times; that it was no subscription of the breth- 
ren, as the Enquirer makes it, but of a very different nature. The 
notion of the primitive fathers about paying tythes. 



CONTENTS. XI 

CHAPTER VI. p. 222. 
Of the Lay-members' rights and privileges in the Church. The En- 
quirer affirms, that to elect and depose their Bishop, were peculiar acts 
belonging to them. Their right of electing is considered and refuted 
before. That of depriving is wholly grounded upon the pretended 
example of the people in Spain depriving of their Bishops Basilides 
and Martialis; the palpable misapplication of that matter of fact. 
The Enquirer owns that the ancients both used the authority of a Sy- 
nod for deposing Bishops, and ascribed the thing itself to them; na3 r , 
confesses it was necessary. A short specimen of the discipline pre- 
scribed and enjoined by the Church of England for the benefit of her 
children after the example of the primitive Church. 

CHAPTER VII. p. 231. 
Of the government and policy of the primitive Church in her eccle- 
siastical courts ; the Enquirer affirms, the laity and clergy were in joint 
commission, and all of them judges there. He offers the primitive 
father's expositions of the several texts, where the power of the keys 
was granted, for proof of it : yet owns that some of the ancients under- 
stood that power given to St. Peter, Mat. 16. 18. 19. as peculiar to 
Bishops only, and that Origen and St. Cyprian agreed to it, so long as 
Bishops were orthodox. But others of the ancients, he says, expound^, 
Mat. 1G. 17, 18. as a grant to the whole Church. He instances in 
Tertullian and Firmilian, yet neither of them refer to that text in his 
quotations from them. Tertullian's authority is very different from 
this application of it, and so is Firmilian's too ; and yet that from 
Clemens Romanus is much mrre foreign and surprising still ; and so is 
St. Cyprian's evidence for it, after his declaration about the power of 
the keys; yet he is quoted for the people's power in the consistory 
again ; but no one quotation from him implies any such thing either in 
respect to the judicial acts of censuring or absolving offenders, or any 
one particular relating to them. The sense of that primitive martyr 
in points of ecclesiastical discipline compared with that of the Enqui- 
rer, and the difference manifestly shewn. 

CHAPTER VIII. p. 254. 

Every single congregation in the primitive Church, had not a power 
within themselves, to exercise all ecclesiastical discipline. And a far- 
ther proof that primitive dioceses were not congregational . Of Synods 
and the proper members of them ; the Enquirer affirms, that Presbyters, 



XII CONTENTS. 

Deacons and Lay-representatives, as well as Bishops, had a right of 
session in them. His authority for it from the synodical Epistle of the 
council at Antioch, considered and refuted. As also his other author- 
ity from an anonymous author in Eusebius. His last reserve from the 
example of St. Cyprian's council against the lapsed discussed at large, 
and shewn to imply no such thing. An account given of the Presby- 
ters coming to Synods in the primitive times, and of the Laity also. 
Remarks upon the Enquirer's singular notion of the first division of 
ecclesiastical provinces. 

CHAPTER IX. p. 272. 
■* The unity of the Church. * * * * * * 

* The table of Contents of this chapter having got mislaid, the pub- 
lisher is unable to give them in full, agreeably to the English edition. 



PREFACE 

TO THE FIRST AMERICAN EDITION. 

It is an evident fact, that very many of the prevailing 
errors in religion, are attributable to mistaken views 
respecting the "Constitution, Discipline, Unity and Wor- 
ship of the Primitive Church." 

Next to that inward and transforming power of reli- 
gion, which has its seat in the heart and affections, and 
is able to control the actions, and guide the lives of all who 
feel its influence, a correct understanding of the outward 
form and constitution of the Church of Christ is unques- 
tionably essential. 

If, as the scriptures assures us, there be but "one Lord, 
one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all;" if the 
word of God be at unity in itself; and if the doctrine and 
discipline of the Church in the first and purest ages of 
Christianity, weresuch as Christ and his Apostles estab- 
lished, and intended to be transmitted down to those who 
should come after them, then it becomes an important 
duty for every one who calls himself a Christian, to 
ascertain well the truth in these matters, that he may 
be well grounded and settled in his opinions, and at all 
times able to give an answer to every one that asketh a 
reason for the prnciples which he adopts. 

The following pages, recommended as they are by 
some of the highest authorities and distinguished divines 
of the Protestant Episcopal Church in these United States, 
as a work of singular merit, must, it is believed, prove 
in this country, and at this time, as it has done on the oth- 
er side the Atlantic, a very valuable aid in forming a 
right judgement pn the important subjects of which it 
treats. 



XIV PREFACE* 

It can scarcely have escaped the notice of the most 
inattentive observer of the various controversies which 
have originated in this country, on the constitution and 
ministry of the Church, in its early ages, that the work 
of Lord Chancellor King, intitled an "Enquiry into the 
Constitution^ Discipline, Unity and Whorship of the 
Primitive Church;" has not unfrequently been quoted and 
referred to by anti-Episcopalians, in a tone of triumph, 
which would lead one to imagine, it had never re- 
ceived an answer, and, as has been asserted, that it is 
unanswerable. But whoever will attentively and can- 
didly peruse the following pages, must unquestionably 
come to a very differrent conclusion. Indeed so com- 
plete and triumphant was the refutation of Mr. Slater 
viewed at the time of its publication, that we have strong 
circumstantial evidence of its having produced an entire 
conviction in the mind ol Lord King himself, of the error 
of his views, from the fact, not only of his never having 
attempted a reply to the "Original Draught"; but, that 
shortly after its appearance, he presented Mr Slater to a 
lucrative benefice, which, as Lord Chancellor, was at 
his disposal. 

It was the intention of the publisher of this first Amer- 
can edition of the "Original Draught," as was promised 
in his Prospectus, to accompany it with a short biographic- 
al notice of the author; but after improving every means 
accessible to him for obtaining information, and delaying 
the publication nearly two years, he has been entirely 
unsuccessful in procuring any notices of his life and cha- 
racter, which he supposed would be of any considerable 
value. This he exceedingly regrets, since it would un- 
doubtedly prove highly satisfactory to Episcopalians 
generally, to possess some information of the life of so- 



PREFACE. XV 

able and learned a champion of their cause. The depri- 
vation of this satisfaction cannot, however, lessen the 
real intrinsic merits of the work, and he therefore sub- 
mits it to serious and candid inquirers after truth, in the 
hope that it may exert an extensive and benificial influ- 
ence in the advancement of the cause of pure religion, 
and of primitive truth and order. 



PREFACE. 



The following sheets will need the less apology for 
them, since all, who call themselves Christians, are so 
nearly interested in the subject of them; and the partic- 
ular author of that learned Tract they more immediately 
refer to, will find them little more than a friendly com- 
pliance with a modest request of his own. His collec- 
tions from the venerable records of the primitive church, 
entitled, "An Enquiry into the Constitution, Discipline, 
Unity and Worship of it," were many years since made 
public, as I am now assured, though my little acquaint- 
ance with the modern business of the press, made me a 
stranger to it, till some considerable time after the second 
edition came abroad. In his preface to them, (calcula- 
ted, I presume, for the first impression,) he shews an 
humble diffidence of his youthful peiformance; and de- 
sires another sense might be given of his severed quota- 
tions, (if need required,) for better information of himself 
and others. I confess I saw need enough of that, at my 
first perusal of his book, and not a little wondered, that 
no friendly hand had done that kindness for him long be- 
fore. As to my own part, I had never walked in the 
unpleasant paths of controversy to that day; and, besides 
the consciousness of my unfitness for it, had aversion 
enough ever to set a foot in them; but seeing none had 
answered, or was answering, as 1 could hear of, so rea- 
sonable a desire, though men of letters in both kingdoms 
of our United Island, had declared an earnest expectation 
of it, and the Holy Church of England in particular, has 
reproached the silence of her children in an argument 
that so plainly struck at her foundation; filial obedience^ 



II PREFACE. 

I may say, to so faithful a Parent, moved me to use the 
best endeavors I could, to vindicate her truly apostolical 
constitution, and to plead the cause of injured antiquity, 
as well as hers; for that loth are truly one, in this case, 
the impartial reader will easily observe, when he sees the 
palpable mistakes corrected, and the unfair representa- 
tions of the venerable fathers of the church* so obvious 
in almost every page of those plausible collections, re- 
stored to their genuine sense again. 

This is what may be expected here: And I am not 
conscious I have strained any one passage in antiquity, 
beyond the true meaning of the venerable authors them- 
selves, to form a different construction of it from that of 
the ingenious Enquirer. I should count it the worst of 
sacrilege to do so; the goods of the church are not so 
sacred as her sense is. What each quotation appeared 
to me, from the best authority, and closest attention I 
could use, I have fairly represented here; if defective in 
apprehending the true sense, or injudicious in the infer- 
ences from them, I heartily submit, in my turn, to the 
charity of better information. For as I write with a 
conscientious regard to undeceive some, so lam infinite- 
ly more concerned not to be deceived myself; and I wish 
no greater freedom, from prejudice or party, in any who 
read or censure these papers, than I am conscious of in 
the composing of them. 

Every one too well knows, of what a large and exten- 
sive nature this unhappy subject is, and that the contro- 
versial books about it are sadly numerous, and full of 
different schemes and arguments, according to the genius 
of sects, and times, and persons; many of which might 
have fallen in with several parts of this discourse, had I 
been inclined to dispute, (as I bless God I am not,) but I 



PREFACE. Ill 

have kept close to the single treatise before me, and that 
ibr two reasons especially: 

1. Because I heard from many hands, that the less 
learned, and more prejudiced, adversaries of the truly 
Primitive Church of England, have made their boasts of 
it, and from its not being answered yet, have proclaimed 
it an unanswerable vindication of their separation from 
her. 

2. Because I think, that all the scattered arguments 
and pleas, for their unwarrantable schism, are reducible 
to some one or other, of the great variety of quotations 
cited in it. For a good part of those mistaken brethren, 
we know, with great zeal plead, the authority of Holy 
Scriptures to be clear on their side, and these sit down 
contentedly, and triumph in their own comments, and 
constructions of those Holy Oracles; others pay some 
deference also to venerable antiquity; and these two great 
witnesses seem to be agreed upon by all, not only to give 
in their evidence, but even to be umpires for them, to 
determine all the fundamental points in difference between 
them. The reader will find the testimony both of one 
and the other fairly summed up here; and I only pray 
he may bring a prepared mind with him, to sit down by 
the peaceful award, which those authentic arbitrators 
make, for the blessed union of all christians, in one and 
the same Holy Catholic Church together; which individ- 
ual Church of Christ, they visibly enough distinguish for 
us all, from every counterfeit image of it, by the truly 
primitive, single, and apostolical constitution of it. And 
as for those who regard little, either one or the other, of 
these two great authorities, but overrule all outward tes. 
timony, of God or man, by an inward witness of their 
own, (subject to no trial of the Holy Scriptures them, 



IV PREFACE. 

selves, and impatient to hear of a visible church, and the 
teachings of men,) I dispute not with them; they super- 
cede all that trouble for me. I only recommend them to 
the Divine compassion for their better instruction, with 
affectionate grief and prayer for them. 

To the reader I have this only to observe farther, that 
since these papers were nigh wrought off the press, an 
ingenious treatise came to my hands, entitled, "The In- 
validity of the Dissenting Ministry, dpc." wherein some 
particular quotations in the enquiry, relating to the Pres- 
byter's power of ordination, are judiciously explained, 
and with clear reasoning answered to the full; which 
might have shortened my work, and the author's trouble 
in that single point, had I been so fortunate as to have 
known it in time: However, it is but one link of the chain 
of mistakes in that whole performance, (to use that learn- 
ed author's phrase,) which fell under his consideration; 
and therefore less offence will be taken, I hope, if some- 
thing like it, though in a more imperfect manner, should 
be met with here again. 

I must add for the ingenious Enquirer's satisfaction, 
too, that I have all along been mindful of his strict charge, 
not to wander out of the straight bounds he set me, of 
the three first centuries of the church; I think he will 
have little reason to complain of that. But as to the 
particular editions, of the several authors he quotes, I 
rannot say I have been so happy, as to have it in my 
power, to make use of none but them, though I gladly 
would have done it, in answer to so reasonable a desire; 
but choice of impressions has not always fallen in my 
way. To make the best amends I could, I think I havo 
seldom failed, to mention the edition I use, which I hope 
will be accepted, where I could do no more. 



AN 

ORIGINAL DRAUGHT 

OF THE 

PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &c. 

It is a melancholy thing to see, that after so long a 
settlement of the christian Church in the world, and that 
by the greatest evidence and demonstration of Divine 
Wisdom and Power, that ever any work of God was 
wrought amongst men; still the constitution of this Church 
should want enquiring after: that this city of God, set 
on purpose, by the Divine Founder of it, on a holy and 
conspicuous Hill, to the end that every simple one who 
passeth by, might readily see it, and comfortably enter 
in to be saved, should be hid from multitudes, even of se- 
rious Enquirers after it, in these latter times. I have 
little inclination to examine, what occasion has been 
given, in the last or present age, for such a wild variety 
of opinions about it, as has filled the minds of too many 
men with dangerous amusements only, and afforded little 
or no comfortable and solid assurance of the thing; for 
this (I fear) would rather aggravate, than heal; and might 
teach our enemies to reproach us, instead of instructing 
mistaken friends: but wheresoever the blame of all must 
lie, in respect of men, I am sure it is a sorrowful instance 
to us all, of the too successful wiles of that noted adver- 
sary in the Oracles of Truth, who, throughout every age, 
has counterfeited the works of God, that he might deceive 
the children of men; and because he can never extin. 
2* 



2 AN ORIGINAL BKAUGHT OF 

guish the light of truth, has either raised mists to make 
it shine dim, or formed meteors of his own, that might be 
mistaken for it. Things are come to such a height and 
warmth amongst us now, that nothing less (I fear) than 
the interposing hand of Heaven, in a more than ordinary 
way, will ever undeceive the multitudes of prejudiced 
brethren in the nearer and remoter parts of Christen- 
dom, and so entirely repair the breaches of this Holy 
City of God, as to make it (what it ought to be) in .per- 
fect unity within itself. 

Yet, when I meet with any promising apearance of a 
virtuous design to clear up all these difficulties for us, and 
help us to a better understanding with one another; the 
subject does affect me; and I cannot but have some se- 
cret inclination to look into the management of it: not so 
much to satisfy myself in the knowledge of a true Church 
(which I bless God I have long been satisfied in) as that 
I cannot be wholly unconcerned for others; and would 
gladly see, why, and how, we come to differ in so great 
. and plain a matter, who so generally agree in other fun- 
damentals of the Christian Truth. 

This is the main motive which induced me to look into 
the Treatise before me.: the title page alone offering me 
a subject, which I had a veneration for; and the short 
preface fairly intimating to me, that the learned author 
had a -proper sense of the weightiness of the argument 
he undertook, and as fairly promised a suitable integrity 
in the performance of it: how far these encouraging 
hints and solemn promises are made good in the work it- 
self, I shall leave to be determined by the reader, when I 
have particularly considered the several parts of this 
elaborate enquiry, which I now propose to do, in order as 
they lie. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 



CHAP. I. 



To begin with his first chapter then, wherein his main 
business is, to examine the primitive notion of the word 
Church; upon a due apprehension whereof, he truly and 
ingenuously tells us, that a right understanding of a great 
part of his discourse does depend. Nothing can be more 
proper and material therefore in the whole enquiry be- 
fore us, than to settle this first; wherein if we can hap- 
pily agree, the whole work will considerably be short- 
ened to our hands, and we shall make a great advance, 
at once, towards a friendly accommodation, in several 
ensuing particulars, which have so near a relation to 
this. 

He mentions many notions of a Church in those early 
times, but fixes upon one only, as* the usual and common 
acceptation of the word, and which (he says) he chiefly 
treats of; and therefore, since I mean to differ or dispute 
as little as I can, I shall pass over most of the other less 
material notions of it, at present, (how little soever I can 
consent to some particulars in them) and apply myself to 
consider that main and principal one, which is indeed 
the great hinge upon which most of his other specula, 
tions turn. 

The word Church (says hef ) is frequently to he under- 
stood of a particular Church, i. e. of a company of 
believers, who at one time, in one and the same place, did 
associate themselves together, and concur in the partici- 
pation of all the institutions and ordinances of Jesus 
Christ, with their proper Pastors and Ministers: And in 
this sense (says he) we must understand the Church of 

*P £ ge 7, $ 2. fPage 3, $ 2. 



4 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

Rome, the Church of Smyrna, the Church of Antioch, 
the Church of Athens, the Church of Alexandria, or the 
Church in any other such place whatsoever, when we 
meet them in the earliest writers of the Christian 
Church. 

This is then his positive definition of a primitive par- 
ticular Church: and to represent all fairly, let us hear 
his instances or authorities for it from the venerable fa- 
thers themselves. He begins with Irenceus; for thus 
(says he) that is, in the sense which I have given you of 
a primitive Church, Irenceus mentions that Church which 
is in any place (ea quce est in quoque loco Ecclesia, or ra- 
ther, inquoquo loco, as I find it in Iren. 1. 2 c. 56.) — 
Now this, I must confess, is a very dark authority tome, 
to prove what kind of Church that holy father meant 
by it: if there be any consequence in it, to the purpose 
it is here brought for, it must needs lie in these two plain 
words (quoquo loco) in any place and from them, as 
far as I am able to imagine, it can no otherwise be infer- 
red, than one of these two ways; either first, That there 
was no other particular Church at that time to be in any 
place whatsoever, but just such an one as this learned 
author here quotes this place to prove for him, which 
would be such a singular fallacy in reasoning (if he should 
apply it in that sense) as I cannot suppose our ingenious 
Enquirer can be guilty of: or else, secondly, it must be, 
that the word place has such a scanty notion necessarily 
tied to it, that it would have been no sense in that learned 
father to have meant a larger circuit by it, than that of 
an ordinary meeting-house in our modern phrase: For, 
if place be such an affection of bodies, as conforms itself 
to every dimension of the thing that is applied to it, (as I 
think both naturalists and logicians will warrant us to 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 5 

say,) then to be said to be in any place, unless the par- 
ticular measure of that place were expressed too, adds 
nothing in the least to prove of what extent that thing 
is. So that Irenams's Church in any place, was such a 
sort of Church, to be sure, as they then understood a 
Christian Church to be; but whether parochial, diocesan, 
provincial, or any other kind whatsoever, as to the ex- 
tent or circuit of it, is not one jot the clearer to me, by his 
calling it a Church in any place, though our more dis- 
cerning Enquirer (it seems) saw his own scheme so visi- 
bly lie in it. 

His second instance of such a primitive Church, as he 
has denned for us, is taken from an expression of Diony- 
sms Alexandrinus, when he was banished to Cephro in 
Lybia. I will give it in his own translation,* "There 
came so many christians to him (says he) that even 
there he had a Church." Here was a Christian Church, 
it seems, and that in a straight place of banishment too; 
though had it been translated a Christian Assembly only, 
I am sure no wrong had been done to the original word; 
but I shall not insist on that. It is concluded, (by apply- 
ing it in this place) that it needs must be such a Church 
•as could meet together for religious worship in one place 
only, and no otherwise. I confess, it may be so; and 
that will prove but little, that this ancient father had no 
other notion of a particular Christian Church, than such 
an one as this; or, even that he meant it so, in this very 
quotation itself; for, by looking a little farther on in this 
continued relation of his, I think it will evidently appear, 
that he makes his own particular Church a quite differ- 
ent thing from it. This I shall consider by and by; only 

*Dionys, Alex, apud Euseb. 7 c.ll p, 259. UoWjj mveyi$r)[i<Tev 
'E.TtKyrjaia. 



6 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

let me first leave one short remark or two upon this lit- 
tle Church at Cephro. 

Dionysius himself calls it (in our author's own quota- 
tion ) ™\\y 'EKKyrjffia that is, in true English, I think, 
a pretty numerous Church at least; Valesius, in his trans- 
lation, calls it, magna muliitudo Fidelium, a great multi- 
tude of believers. Dionysius farther says, it consisted 
of a threefold concourse of Christians; 1st, of all the 
^brethren that came from Alexandria to him; 2d, of oth- 
ers that came out of Egypt thither; and 3d,|which I think is 
worth considering, he tells us, that before he left the 
place, &* SMyoi T&v.iwQv, not a few of the heathens left their 
Idols, and came over to his Church. Not a few, indeed, 
we have reason to believe, since the humble Confessor 
himself ventures to speak, as the holy Apostle did upon 
the like occasion, that God had opened a door to him 
there to propagate the Gospel amongst them, and he 
thought he had sent him thither for that very purpose to 
convert them. All this amounts not, I own, to an un- 
questionable certainty of more than a single congrega- 
tion at Cephro, and I have no occasion to desire it should; 
but I think it bids so fair for it, that it looks like little 
choice" of authorities in the case, when we search for 
such an one as this, to prove that a particular Church in 
that age consisted of no more. 

But the truth is, (and I desire it may be noted all along 
in this discourse) that the point in question does not lie 
here; whether there was a church in that place, or, in- 
deed in any other, that de facto had but one congrega- 
tion to denominate it so; for who doubts but at the first 
conversion of the Heathen World, the number of believ- 
ers in some particular places, might not for some time 
amount to more than that; and records of many particu* 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 7 

lar churches afterwards might be wanting (as our learn- 
ed Enquirer argues upon a like occasion in the 148th 
page of this treatise) to set forth the entire state and con- 
dition of such primitive churches to us? But the true 
question is, whether if more Congregations than one, had 
been actually gathered or converted in any place what- 
soever, and exercised their offices of Divine worship in 
distinct and separate places from one another, so that 
their first, proper, and chief Pastor could not be able 
personally to attend the service of them all; whether the 
property, I say, must in such case be altered, and they 
could no longer be one church, or be subject to one and 
the same supreme ecclesiastical Governor, (call him what 
we please) but must of necessity be formed then into 
more particular independent churches, and a supreme 
Pastor, unaccountable to the other, (or to any else) must 
have presided over each of them, and denominated them 
as many particular churches, as there were single as- 
semblies that met together to celebrate the ordinances of 
the Christian Church. This, I humbly conceive, our 
learned Enquirer should have proved from this, or any 
other authorities he produces hereafter in defence of his 
own opinion, if he meant effectually to support his fun- 
damental scheme by them. And since it no where does 
appear from one end of his elaborate enquiry to the oth- 
er, that he has done so, I must needs say this is such a 
fundamental defect, as renders the whole performance of 
very little use to that pious design he professes in it, of 
reconciling differences about the constitution of the prim, 
itive Church. 

But it is time I make my promise good, and shew that 
Dionysius himself meant no such church, even in this 
very narrative of his, as he is here quoted for: and this 



8 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

will require that a short account be first given of the 
present condition that holy confessor was then in. The 
case was thus; the persecuting Governor of the prov- 
ince, breathing out greater threatenings still against the 
banished christians, ordered them all to be removed into 
the inhospitable region of Maroeotis, and particularly 
assigned the quarters of Dionysius himself at a place 
called Colluthio; the holy Bishop was troubled at the 
thoughts of this change; for though he knew that region 
better than he did the other, yet they talked of it as if 
there were small hopes of many christian brethren, or 
indeed of any sort of good men to be found there. But 
some of the faithful about me, says he, comforted me in 
this distress: and what, were the arguments of comfort that 
they offered to him? Why, they put me in mind, says 
he, of this, that Colluthio was a place nearer to the city 
(of Alexandria) still, and though I had such concourse 
of brethren at Cephro, says he, that I could ^arvrepor 
tKKXrjoia^uv that is, have a church of a very large com- 
pass, even in that remote and desolate country, yet they 
told me I should enjoy more constantly, at Colluthio, the 
company of them I loved most, and counted dearest to 
me in the world; for such as those* they said, would 
come and make their abode there, insomuch that there 
would be congregations of them in sundry places up and 
down, as in so many suburbs remotely situated from the 
city; and this, {says he,) I found to be very true; that is, 
such a concourse of christians did resort to him there, 
and such distinct assemblies there were of them, during 
his abode in that place. And now, if these distinct con- 

* A0/£ovrai yap Kai avairavaovrac kcli a>s ev irpoa^ctot^ (oopporsp* 
tmperots Kara, pepos zcovrat crvvaywyai. Euseb. ibd. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. &C. V 

gregationsof believers were under the spiritual jurisdic- 
tion and government of Dionysius alone, and were pecu- 
liarly his church and his people, as the only bishop or 
supreme ecclesiastical pastor over them, by whose order 
and direction alone ministerial offices could be perform- 
ed to each of them, (as the historian's account of that 
place and time does evidently prove him to be) and none 
butf Presbyterss and Deacons, (as they are subordinate- 
jy now taken) are mentioned in the whole narration be- 
sides, some accompanying him in his troubles, some 
wandering to and fro in banishment, and some particu- 
larly named with marks of honor, for attending their 
charge and ministry in the city, in the heat of all the 
persecution; besides what Dionysius might himself or- 
dain, if the necessity of his church required it; then I 
think it needs no farther proof, that this holy confessor, 
and father of the church, could have no such notion of 
a particular church in his time, as cur learned author's 
quotation (out of this very narrative of his) has imputed 
to him. 

And yet there is one remarkable passage more in the 
sufferings- of this holy confessor, that makes it much 
clearer still, if need should be. Take it in his own ac- 
count of himself, as Eusebius has transcribed it from 
him, in the same chapter with all that we have heard 
already. Germanus, an invidious Christian Bishop, had, 
it seems, reproached Dionysius, as if he had fled and de- 
serted his church of Alexandria, without holding any 
religious assemblies before he went off; which was in- 
deed the pious custom of the churches then, as often as 

t ^KoKaBrjCQVTai Si fioi (XD^piuSvTZQoq n jxs yia^tpog km Sic.kovoi <pav$o$ Kai 
RvgiStog teat Xa/p'/j'//wv. — Euseb. ib* 

3 



10 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

any persecution was visibly nigh at hand; to the end that 
Catechumens might be baptized, the eucharist adminis- 
tered to the faithful, and solemn exhortations to constan- 
cy and perseverance left with them all, to prepare and 
fortify them against the trials which were immediately 
coming upon them. Now, how does the holy Bishop an- 
swer this charge? He first shews that his early appre- 
hension and sudden condemnation left no time or means 
for him to perform any one of those ministerial offices 
by himself in person: But then immediately subjoins, and 
says, that * by God's assistance he was not wanting in a 
visible assembly neither; but with all diligence, says he, 
J ordered those in the city to assemble, as if I had been 
personally present with them, being absent indeed in the 
body, as it is said, but present in the spirit with them. — 
Using the Apostle's phrase, who so governed and presi- 
ded over churches at a distance. Here is a solemn as- 
sembly then of the christians in Alexandria, called to- 
gether at the command of their absent Bishop: And I 
presume none will think they met on this occasion, with- 
out celebrating some ordinances at least of religious wor- 
ship. Nay, I cannot but say, that unless most or all of 
those holy offices were performed there, which I just now 
mentioned as customary and necessary to be done in such 
a juncture of time as this was, the holy confessor had 
but slightly answered the charge and accusation it was 
his business there to clear. But least of all could he have 
comforted himself, that by God's assistance he had caused 
such a considerable part of his cure to assemble there, if 

*AXA* y<$£ rrjs atcdrjTrjs ripeh pera ts Kvpis cvwywy7]$ aTtt^a^lv' a\\a 
trKvSaioltpov tss ficv tv ttj tto\u cvviKporsv ws ovvuv' arcov jjlsv rio crt>//a7«, «s 
iiKov ws ziTTuv [or, w£ uxuv, as some copies have it,] irapwv £s tw irvzvfAalt. 
Eusseb.ib.p 211. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 11 

the offices which should minister all the spiritual help 
they then assembled for, were not dispensed to them too. 
To apply this, therefore, to the case in hand — 

What manner of church was this of Alexandria at this 
time? The Bishop in exile had several congregations of 
his flock in and about the place where his miserable ban- 
ishment had confined him: The presbyters in his absence, 
and by his order and authority, hold a religious assembly 
in the city itself: One only Bishop all this while issues 
out precepts and acts, as chief pastor and governor of 
these distinct and so far distant congregations, and is by 
the general language of the Catholic Church, and of the 
authentic historians of that time, entitled Bishop, (with- 
out partner or competitor) of the particular church of 
Alexandria. 

If this be consistent with the definition of such a par- 
ticular church, as this primitive father was produced to 
bear witness to, and that in this very narrative of his, 
where all that I have here offered is recorded by his own 
hand, I am afraid such enquiries into antiquity will help 
but little to settle a wavering mind about the true consti- 
tution of the Church. 

There is one instance more brought by our learned 
author, to shew that the word church was anciently taken 
in his sense; and because it is a short one, I shall not pass 
it by, though it is more surprising to me than both the 
others. It is from TertuIUan's Exhortat. ad Castit. where 
that father says, TJbi tres, Ecclesia est; where three are 
together, there we have a church: Now to stop at a com- 
ma, after four single words, in any quotation, where two 
words more would bring him to a full period, and explain 
the author's meaning too, is a little strange to me; for 
Tertullian's whole sentence is only this; TJbi ires, Eccle* 



J 2 AX OEIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

sia est, licet laid; that is, where three are, there a church 
is, though they be all but Laymen: And is it not strange 
to any man, as well as me, that such an extraordinary 
church as this, with but three Laymen in it, should be 
brought to explain the primitive notion of a particular 
church associating together with their pastors and minis- 
ters for participation of the ordinances and institutions of 
Christ? And yet to this very quotation our ingenious En- 
quirer immediately subjoins; in this sense, says he, we 
must understand- the Church of Rome, of Smyrna, of 
Antioch, and in short, in any other such place whatso- 
ever. 

There is an observation in our inquisitive authors 4th 
notation of a church, particularly calculated for the use 
of his own scheme, and therefore must briefly be consid- 
ered: He observes * there, that he never met with the 
word church used in the singular number by any of the 
Fathers for a collection of many particular churches, ex- 
cept once only in f Cyprian, who mentions the church 
of God in Africa and Numidia. Now there is something 
in Irenazus, (quoted by himself too in the very next leaf) 
which looks very like it; for all the Christian Churches 
which were gathered from among the Gentiles, that 
learned father expresses by a church, in the singular 
number, the expression you have in the margin, X as 4 uo - 
ted to my hand in the 7th page of the Enquiry, and that 
implies a collection of churches sure beyond all excep- 
tion. But the trath is, I am not aware in the least what 
advantage this can be to the point in question, to observe 
that a particular church is ordinarily expressed in the 
singular number, since it is a natural expression for it^ 

*Pag.4. tCyp.Ep. 71. H- 

|Ea quoe ex Gentibus est JCcclesia. lien- 1.4. c. 37 « 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 13 

and no otherwise explains the constituent parts of it, than 
to say, it is a church somewhere in some place or anoth- 
er, which how much it clears up the notion of it, we have 
seen before. Nor is it of better use to observe, that na- 
tional or provincial churches are usually expressed in the 
plural number, since it affords no evidence at all to prove 
what manner of churches they were, that were compre- 
hended under them, which is the only point in question. 

I make no doubt, that our Author's suggestion in it is 
this: that if a particular church had more congregations 
than one in it, it would surely be expressed in the plural 
number; and why? Because a single congregation and a 
particular Church, he would have us take for granted, 
were one and the same thing in the sense and language 
of the ancients; which, though he has not proved yet, 
(and I think by the little already said, he will find it hard 
to do) yet this is an early preparation for it, and some- 
thing like begging the question beforehand; therefore, I 
thought it not improper to take a little notice of it, es- 
pecially since in matter of fact it is a mere oversight of 
the Enquirer; for I shall shew instances to the contrary 
in the beginning of the next chapter. 

The notion of a primitive church thus cleared, as we 
have seen, he proceeds in a regular and proper method, 
to enquire into the constituent parts of it, and to consider 
the particular offices, together with the joint and several 
acts of the respective members of the church he has be- 
fore defined for us. 

I am willing to set out, and go along with him as far as 
truth and primitive authorities, fairly represented, will 
give me leave to do. His first division of the members 
of a church is just and unexceptionable; he distinguish- 
es them both as primitive and modern christians do, into 
3* 



14 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

Clergy and Laity, shutting out Tertuttian's wild conceit 
now, though offered unawares before, as a notion of a 
church wholly unaccountable. * His division of the 
clergy afterwards into their particular orders and de- 
grees, as far as names and titles go, is as orthodox and 
primitive as the other: For Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, 
(so called at least by him) are as approved ecclesiastical 
officers in his singular scheme, as, in a genuine and prop- 
er distinction of them, we are sure they always were in 
every true Church of Christ since the Apostle's times. 
But I am sorry to say here, that this close adhering to a 
primitive form of words, without retaining faithfully the 
primitive and genuine signification of them, is only a more 
plausible and dangerous way of setting off mistakes, and 
makes men lose the truth, without being sensible how it 
steals away. And this, I am afraid, will prove the case 
of our ingenious Enquirer himself, and has caused his 
performance to pass so insensibly with others; because 
there are some shades of antiquity in the Draught, though 
nearly examined, but very few natural and original lines 
are to be found. And when you have seen what Bishops 
and Priests he has settled in his church, what offices, 
acts, and powers he has assigned to the saveral members 
of it, 3'ou will need no other light to discover this by, or 
to discern the difference between things and names. 

To proceed, then; he seems fairly to derive all power 
and authority in the church from the true fountain of it, 
ourBtessed Lord himself, and his inspired Apostles com- 
missioned and empowered by him to plant and govern 
churches: But the manner of their conveying this pow- 
er to others, either for assistance or succession to them- 
selves in their great charge, which is a main part of this 

*Pag. 9. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &€. 15 

Enquiry, I am afraid will not appear so plain. Let us 
see his thoughts of it. 

He begins with quoting two authorities from antiquity, 
to shew the Apostles' method of constituting pastors and 
governors in the churches they gathered. The first is 
from Clemens Romanus, (in his 1st Ep. ad Cor. p. 54.) 
where that father says, the Apostles went forth preach- 
ing in city and country, (as our Enquirer is pleased to 
translate and place the words) but in * countries and 
cities, (as it is in Clemens himself; and perhaps that 
slight variation has some use in it afterwards, and there- 
fore, the Greek words are omitted in his quotation) ap- 
pointing the first-fruits of their ministry for Bishops and 
Deacons. Thus far Clemens: To which our Enquirer 
adds, that the Apostles generally left those Bishops and 
Deacons to govern those particular churches over which 
they had placed them, whilst they themselves passed for- 
ward, <fyc. Now, if he means that they left them always 
as supreme church. governors there, I conceive the Holy 
Scriptures will be clear against him; for that supremacy 
of power over all the Apostolical Churches, for the great- 
est part, at least, of the Apostles' lives, was reserved in 
their own hands, by which St. Paul so justly imputed to 
himself f the care of all the churches; and his com- 
mands, censures, and peremptory precepts, so visible in 
most of his epistles to them, do evidently prove the same; 
and therefore, whatsoever assistants they were to the 
Apostles by their ministry and regulation of the churches 
under them, they could not be ecclesiastical officers in- 
vested with a plenitude of church power: I only note this 

* Ka]a xw/;aj Zv <ai toXsij K7\pvGaov~ji<; KaOtfavov ra$ cnrapx&S avjuv sis 
Etnctkoths <3kou 6iaicovng, Sec. — Clem. Rom. Ep. 1 2d Cor. p. 5-1 
t 2 Cor. xi. 28. 



16 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

here (which must be more at large considered afterwards) 
for the sake of his second authority immediately quoted 
from Tertullian, to the same intent with this: For thus, 
says he, Tertullian sayeth, Clemens was ordained Bishop 
of Rome by St. Peter, and Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna 
by St. John. 

Now, see here, how the fundamental mistake insinuates 
itself, as it were, at unawares. Here are two quotations 
brought to prove that the Apostles themselves ordained 
pastors and spiritual, officers in the several churches they 
planted; and because the name of Bishop is attributed 
to them in both places, therefore they are to pass for 
church officers, not only equal in their apostolical institu- 
tion, but in the fulness of their commission, powers, and 
order too. Here lies the secret spring, indeed, that gov- 
erns the motions of the whole discourse; and if it were set 
right by an even and unbiassed hand, the controversy 
would move in a regular and uniform manner on both 
sides, till the adversaries met, I verily believe, in a bles- 
sed harmony and consent with one another. For if these 
Apostolical church officers, expressed only by a common 
name with one another, were but understood to be of a 
different order and degree by the very tenor of their first 
commission, as to the extent of powers, prerogatives, and 
jurisdiction, conveyed and assigned to each of them, (as 
I think the Epistles to Timothy and Titus alone would 
satisfy a sober christian, that such a difference there re- 
ally was) the most entangled knot of the dispute would 
then be untied, and probably whole churches and nations 
of divided christians now, would, to the unspeakable joy 
of all good men, go hand in hand to the house of God 
together, upon the settling of that single point alone. 

What unexceptionable authorities there are in the ve- 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 17 

nerable records of antiquity for it, besides the holy Scrip- 
tures themselves, and the uninterrupted harmony of the 
Catholic church in it, before the modern innovation at 
Geneva, against it, I shall have occasion enough to ob- 
serve in the sequel of this discourse; and I shall only 
shew here, what considerable reasons our ingenious En. 
quirer has given in this very treatise of his to persuade 
himself, and all other sons of peace, like him, to consent 
to this distinction. 

The first reason I observe from him is this; that for 
want of thus acknowledging this difference of order and. 
prerogative in the church officers ordained by the Apos- 
tles' hands, he has brought a perplexing difficulty upon 
himself, and set the holy Scriptures and primitive fathers 
of the church at a seeming variance, at least, and well- 
nigh palpable contradiction with one another: For t.hua 
he tells us, in the very next paragraph after the two quo- 
tations above-mentioned; f whether, says he, in the apos~ 
tolical and primitive days (here were more Bishops than 
one in a church, at first sight seems difficult to resolve;, 
that the Holy Scriptures, and Clemens Romanus mention 
many in one church, says he, is certain; and,, on the 
other hand, it is as certain, that Ignatius, Tertullian, Cy- 
prian, and the following fathers, affirm, that there was 
and ought to be but one: Tinsso oont ra dictions and sepj-n. 
ing difficulties, as he calls them, he - takes thw pains of 
writing his elaborate Enquiry in hopes to reconcile.— 
Surely, he had some extraordinary inclination to solve 
them in a a peculiar and different way from others; for, 

The second reason I observe from him for reconciling 
all at once, is, because he shews us a more plain, natu- 
ral, and truly primitive way than that, in one single pas* 

f See Enquiry, &c. p. 11. § 5, 



18 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

sage of his book before us. You may find it in his 4th 
chap. p. 65. of this Enquiry; where his assertion is, that 
the first who expressed these church officers by the dis- 
tinct terms of Bishops and Presbyters, was Ignatius, who 
lived in the beginning of the second century. And from 
hence I crave leave to observe these three things: 

1st, That as often as we meet with the word Bishop or 
Presbyter in the Holy Scriptures, we cannot, by the term 
itself, determine which of the two, according to the more 
distinct language of the ages immediately following, we 
must necessarily understand by it; unless the context, or 
some peculiar circumstance besides, does more clearly 
explain it to us. And, 

2dly, That the same latitude of signification must for 
the same reason be allowed to Clemens Romanus's Bish» 
ops and Presbyters too, because that holy Bishop * suf- 
fered martyrdom before Tgnatius's Epistles were written; 
wherein the different and determinate sense of those 
words, as our learned Enquirer affirms, were first estab- 
lished in the church. And therefore, 

3dly, It is but doing justice to Tertullian in his quo- 
tation, and allowing him and all the fathers after him to 
mean by their Bishops such as the whole church did then 
understand, when the pre-eminence of that name above 
flip name of Presbv^ rcr » w ^s fully settled; and to inter- 
pret St. Clemens's Bishops by that warrantable latitude 
of signification which is acknowledged to have been in 
general use in his time, and consequently no violence or 
injustice is done to his quotations, if we take them to be 
meant of such Bishops, as were afterwards determinately 

* Clem. Rom. martyred, A. D. 100. St. Ignatius sent to Rome, 
and in his way writing his Epistles, A, D. 107. See Dr. Cave's Chron 4 
of the three? first centuries . 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 19 

named and allowed to be no others than common Pres- 
byters, in subordination to a higher church officer, (as to 
be sure they were at their first ordination in the Apostles' 
times,) and then the great perplexity and doubtful contra- 
diction of the Holy Scriptures and venerable fathers, 
about one or more Bishops in one and the same church 
at a time, does naturally, and in perfect analogy to the 
sense and language of the primitive church, resolve and 
reconcile itself. For, that many such Bishops, indiffer- 
ently called Presbyters in the Holy Scriptures and first 
age of the church, were placed by the Apostles in par- 
ticular churches, is agreed, I think, by all: But that more 
Presbyters than one of that determinate order or degree, 
which were peculiarly called Bishops afterwards, such as 
Clemens placed by St. Peter at Rome, or St. Polycarp 
by St. John at Smyrna, were ever ordained or settled by 
an Apostle in any particular church of theirs, I think I 
may freely say, is no where to be read in all primitive 
antiquity; and our author's own quotation from Tertul- 
lian here is one very pregnant instance of the thing. 

Thus have I shewn what a peaceable and authentic 
way (agreeable to the sense and writings of the early 
ages our Enquirer appeals to) he himself has pointed out 
for us to compromise that difference; and his laboring to 
do it in a more intricate and unprecedented way, I am 
afraid, will never attain his pious ends <of peace and unity 
so well. 

However, in the very next breath, he fixes upon this 
for a sure truth, that there was but one supreme Bishop 
in a place. This seems a very orthodox and primitive 
assertion: But why such singular difference, in the ex- 
pression itself, from the common language of the holy 
fathers within his own three centuries? They speak often 



20 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

enough of but one Bishop in a church; but of one su- 
preme Bishop in a church, I do not remember I have ever 
read in their writings. Nay, his own quotations in this 
very place, as you may see them in the * margin here, 
'bear witness for me, that the venerable St. Cyprian and 
Cornelius did not express themselves so: And besides, 
the former of these in the name of eighty seven African 
Bishops, then in council with him, declared, that f none 
of them were Bishops over Bishops, What are we to 
understand then by this supreme Bishop, who is to be but 
Bishop of a single church too? The answer "is plain: — 
The common language of the primitive fathers would not 
do here; it would not suit with the following scheme of 
this Enquiry. For when those fathers named a Bishop 
of a church, they needed no epithet of a superlative de- 
gree to distinguish him from any other ecclesiastical offi- 
cer within the church, but concluded the original order 
he was of, did that of course for them. But our learned 
author, who discerns what primitive antiquity never saw, 
viz. that every Presbyter who ministered in any church, 
had received episcopal authority by apostolical institution 
or succession, as properly and truly as any Bishop in the 
Catholic church whatsoever, (which he positively affirms 
to be so, p. 70. of this Enquiry) stood in need of such a 
distinguishing epithet lor his single Bishop indeed; and as 
his phrase appears to be thus plainly singular and new, 
so we may well expect, that the notion itself, upon which 

Unusin ecclesia ad tempus sacerdos. Cyp . Ep. 55. $ 6. forEp. 
59. p. J 29. Edit. Oxon.] 

QvKjnTti?a)o tvt TZmiconov 8siv tv KaOoXiKi] iKKKrjGia. — Ad Fabium 
Antioch . apud Euseb. I. 6, p. 43 # 

f Neque enim quisquam nostrum Episcopum ec Episcoporum cob- 
stituit, Concil. Carthag, in pvsesat. apud Cypr. p. 229. Edit. Gxoru 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 21 

it is grounded, (which I shall not here prevent myself 
from considering in its place) will appear to be so too. 

In the mean time, that orthodox observation he makes 
immediately after this, seems somewhat extraordinary, if 
it were but only for the timing it. He had just said, 
there was but one supreme Bishop in a church, though, 
as I shewed just now, there might be many more Bishops 
there of apostolical institution by their order (in his sense 
of them) as well as that one; and yet forthwith he ob- 
serves to us, that hj the AiaSo X ai, or succession of Bishops, 
ordained by the Apostles, the orthodox were wont to prove 
the succession of their faith, and the novelty of here- 
tics; and quotes two warrantable authorities from Irenseus 
and Tertullian, here noted in the * margin, for it. 

Here was an early occasion given indeed for his sin- 
gular distinction (if he could have warranted it) of a su- 
preme bisliop amongst many other apostolical bishop3 
in the same church together. For without that, this 
great Catholic test to try the true faith by, would have 
proved no test at all: for if more bishops than one, of 
equal original order and apostolical institution too, were 

* Edant originem Ecclesiarum suarum, evolvant crdinem Episco- 
porum suorum, ita per successiones ab initio riecurrentem, ut primus 
ille Episcopus aliquem ex Apostolis vel Apustolicis viris, qui tamen 
cum Apostolis perseveraverit, habuerit autorem et antecessorem : 
hoc enim modo Ecclesise Apostolicas census suos deferunt; sicut Smyr- 
nasorum Ecclesia habens Polycarpum ab Johanna conlocatum refert, 
sicut Romanorum Clementem a Petro ordinatum ; proinde utique cae- 
terae exhibent, quos ab Apostolis in Episcopatum constitutos, Apos 
tolici acminis traduces habeant. De Prescript, advers. Haeret. p. 78. 
[or p. 243. Edit. Rigalt. Lute.t. 1641.] 

Ad earn traditionem quae est ab Apostolis, quae per successions 
Presbyterorum, [or successiones Episcoporum, as it is in the next chap. I 
in Ecclesiis custodpro itur,vocamus eos. Iren. Lib. 3. c. 2. 

3 



22 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

ordinarily in the same particular church together, (as 
our learned author does affirm) then to prove the ortho- 
doxy of a church's faith, by the succession of one partic- 
ular apostolical bishop in a church, had no consequence in 
it at all; because some other of those apostolically or- 
dained bishops might possibly be at the head of an heret- 
ical congregation too, and then the original order and 
succession of these might have been as warrantable an 
argument for them, as the like could be for the other; and 
by that means, heresy and the true faith would havo 
stood upon an equal bottom with one another: This sure 
ly must have been the case, according to our learned au 
thor's modern scheme, unless this cautious epithet of su 
preme had been expressly annexed to that particular bish 
op, upon whom this rule of orthodox succession did de. 
pend. And how Terrullian and Irenseus could so indefin 
itely appeal to such an episcopal succession as this, and 
fix no mark of distinction at all upon the bishops they 
peculiarly meant, is not otherwise to be accounted for, 
but that no such distinction of supreme and subordinate 
or assisting bishops was ever known in their time; and 
so the test in general terms was evident and plain enough 
to all the christian world then. 

This chapter closes with one remark more, which 
seems of so indifferent a nature, that one would be apt to 
pass it over; but because, like all the rest before, it is 
calculated for some greater uses which will be made of it 
afterwards, it must not be overlooked. The remark is 
only this, p. 14: The lilies (says he) of this supreme 
church-officer are most of them reckoned up in one place 
by Cyprian, which, are *Bishop, Pastor, President, Gov- 

•Episcopus, Propositus, Pastor, Gubemator, Antistes, Sacerdot* 
Cyp. Ep. 69. *5, |OrEp. 66, p. 167. Edit. Oxon.] 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 23 

ernor, Superintendent, (So he translates Antistes,) and 
Priest; and farther, (says he,) this is he which in the Rev- 
elations is called the Angel of his Church, as Origen thinks, 
which appellations denote both his authority and office, 
his poiyer S$ duty, <$fc. Now would not any common 
reader be apt to think, that these are the appro, 
priated titles of his supreme church officer? and that 
whenever he met with them in St. Cyprian's writings, or 
any other of such primitive antiquity as his, he must al- 
ways understand that supreme church officer by them? 
else why so carefully noted here ? But no such thing, it 
is quite the contrary; for in his 4th chapter, from p. 64 
to p. 68, he labors with much reading and great zeal to 
prove, that most of all these supreme titles were equally- 
given, and did of right belong, to any Presbyter whatso- 
ever in the christian church. And what is the meaning, 
would one think, of this extraordinary way of arguing ? 
why the case is plain. All the presbyters in any church 
whatsoever are in that place to be owned for primitive 
bishops, without any farther authority or ordination for it 
than they had before; and amongst other great reasons 
for that extraordinary assertion, this is to be a considera- 
ble one, that the same name is very familiarly used by 
the ancients to express them both by: so that having first 
possessed his reader here, that these fore-mentioned titles 
are peculiarly bishops' titles, and then shewing him 
there, that many of them are often attributed to presbyt- 
ers, the inference will go smoothly down, that they are 
unquestionable bishops too; and I will only add, that by 
this argument they must every one of them be supreme 
bishops also. For his chief or supreme bishop was first 
set apart by him to preside over the whole church he 
had assigned for him, before he attributed these several 



24 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

titles to him; and then if they are common to others af- 
terwards, those others must, be chief too, so far as those 
titles can make them bishops at all. j^nd this is more, I 
think, than our Enquirer's own scheme can allow them 
to be; and consequently, this remark will not conclude 
the thing for which it was designed. 

By what has been said, I hope it may appear with 
what caution this first chapter of the learned enquiry 
should be read: if I have been thought long in it, it is 
because I found it true, that the whole discourse would 
very much depend upon it. A right notion of a primitive 
church is the very ground-work that all is to be built up. 
on; this was undertaken to be settled here; how well it 
is performed, I leave now to others to determine. 



CHAP. II. 

The great point to be cleared in the 2d chapter is this; 
That as there was hut one Bishop in a church says he, 
so there was hut one church to a Bishop. This is prim- 
itive language indeed, and would be primitive truth too, 
if the singular notion of a particular church before, had 
not turned a Catholic maxim into an equivocal proposi- 
tion; for by his bishop's church we know he means a 
single congregation. And from one observation of his, 
which he here remarks to us, he would have us assured, 
that the primitive fathers meant so too. His observation 
is this: That the ancient diocesses are never said to con* 
tain churches in the plural, but only a church in the sin- 
gular; now what they contained in them (whether one 
or more of such churches as his) his* quotations say 

*SQe bis Quotations in p. 15 of the Enquiry. 



* THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 25 

nothing of; but they shew indeed, that a bishop's church 
was usually expressed and named then in the singular 
number; and I will only add this observation to it, That 
they were just so expressed and named too in after ages 
of the church, as well as in the first and earliest of them 
all. In the 4th century, under Constantine the great, it is 
notorious how the churches multiplied in the number of 
their people and their oratories too, yet the celebrated 
diocese of Antioch is called no more than* the single 
church of Antioch still; for so that emperor himself 
styles it in his letter to Eusebius, where he applauds his 
humility for not exchanging his lesser diocese of Caesarea 
for it. Eusebiusj* calls the mother-diocese of Jerusalem 
no otherwise than so, in the same century, and about the 
same time. In later ages you will find the language of 
the church holds the same still; for the council of Car- 
thage under Theodosius and Honorius, in the 5th centu- 
ry calls the extensive diocese of St. Augustin.ij: the church 
of Hippo only, in the singular number. And (to come 
nearer home, and be short in so clear a point as this is, 
which I have spoken to in the former chapter) the ven- 
erable§ Bede in his church-history of our native coun- 
try, ordinarily calls both larger or lesser diocesses in the 
land, (whetter of Canterbury, York, Rochester, or the 
like) by this primitive name of the single church of each 
of those places; and that there were more than barely 
one congregation of believers in each or any of these fore- 

*Tt?s Kafla njv Kv1io%nav EtacXricias. Useb. in vit. Constant, 1. 3. e. 16. 
t Tu> tt}9 Eiac\r]<nas rrjg zv lzpoiro\v[iOis TUmcrKOTrio. Ibid. cap. 29. 
^ kvysz'tvos ErriffKOiro? rris EK/cX^crtaj IinTOJvrjg. 
flDorovernensis Ecclesi<e Artistes. Bede'sEccl. Hist. 1.2. c. 18. 
Tobias Hroffensis EcclesiaB pnesul, Wilfrid u$ in Eboracensi Ecclesia* 
Ibid. I. 5. c. 24. 
3* 



26 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

mentioned churches, I believe will not be made a ques- 
tion; and therefore what argument can be grounded on 
this remarkable observation, I confess I do not see. Yet 
after all, the observation is not just or true; for* Euse- 
bius names the church of Alexandria, Gaza, Emesa, &c. 
in the plural number, and their bishop in the singular. — 
[See the quotations in the margin.] 

A more popular one, but of no more force or evidence 
in it, is that which follows; drawn from the sound alone, 
and not the sense, of a single word, j" The ancients 
(says he) frequently denominated their bishop's cure by the 
Greek word Uapouua, The modern English use that 
word now to express a parish, by approaching very near 
in sound indeed to one another. And hence he concludes 
it very probable, at least, that a bishop's cure then, and 
an English parish now, were both the same thing; nay 
he positively^: affirms, that our present sense of the word 
is the very same that the ancient christians took it in; 
and lays a great stress upon the genuine signification of 
the word itself for it. 

Now, beiore I give any account of the use or meaning 
of this primitive word iiapoiKta for a christian church, I 
hope I need not say, that whatever gave occasion for the 
use of it, it could have no respect to any language then 
or now in use amongst us of this nation; it would be too 
absurd so much as to imagine such a thing; and there- 
fore to suggest the modem affinity of the words, by way 
of argument in the case, is directly to amuse only, where 
we undertake to instruct. 

♦OfAlexand. seeEuseb. L 5. c. 9. Of Emesa and Gaza. See 
Euseb. 1.8 c 13 
t See Enq. p. 15. J lb. p, 16, 17, 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 27 

The truest method I know, to learn the idiom or pro- 
priety of a primitive ecclesiastical word, is by one or all 
of these three ways. Either, 

1st, By the sense it bears in the Holy Scriptures, if we 
find it there. Or, 

2d, By the continued use of it in the christian church 
for some time afterwards. Or, 

3d, By the common signification of it in the original 
language from whence it is taken. And by these three 
tests I shall try at present what the word iiapotKia ancient- 
ly might mean. 

In Holy Scripture I find it used by St. Luke, to denote 
a temporary residence of a stranger in a place remote 
from home. For in the question of Cleopas to our blessed 
Lord after his resurrection,* Arj, thou only a stranger in 
Jerusalem, fyc. The original words are zb ptvosirapoiKus 
'UpscaXvn; which evidently includes this iiapouda in it, as the 
immediate theme from whence it comes, and should it 
be rendered with any analogy to the member of a parish, 
or such-like society in the city, the holy penman's sense 
would be very singular and unintelligible indeed. — 
Again, St. Paul uses it in the very same sense and 
signification afterwards; (Ephes. ii. 19.) You are no lon- 
ger strangers and foreigners, says he, calling his foreign- 
ers there by the name ofUdpoiKot, which if we should take 
it in our learned Enquirer's sense, must- be rendered very 
near neighbors, (at least) or fellow members of one and 
the same society together; which I think directly inverts 
the meaning of the holy Apostle; and other such-like 
instances there are. 

So that the Holy Scriptures, you see, suggested a very 

*Luke xxit, 18, 



28 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

different notion of the word n^o^/a to the primitive chris- 
tians, and such an one as should sufficiently warrant, 
and, one would think, give fair occasion to those heaven- 
ly-minded saints to denominate their first societies and 
churches from it; since they ordinarily looked upon 
themselves as mere sojourners and foreigners in the 
world, and were no otherwise accounted by the heathen 
round about them. But, 

Secondly, We often meet with the word UapotKia both 
in the Greek and Latin writers for several ages after- 
wards, denoting the same thing with a diocese of many 
parishes and congregations in it; which farther proves 
that the ecclesiastical sense of the word had not so nar- 
row a notion in it, till particular places determinately 
made it so. « 

In the code of the African church, published both in 
Greek and Latin by Justelius, we meet with Dioecesis 
in one language, rendered by UapoiKta in the other. Thus 
it is in the title of the* 5(>th Canon, and again, and again 
in the body of the Canon itself. So St. Jerome, trans- 
lating an epistle of St.f Epiphanius to John, bishop of 
Jerusalem, expresses both their large diocesses (as they 
surely were then) by the word parochia only. St.J Au- 
gustin, in his epistle to Pope Caelestin, tells him, that the 
town of Fussala was forty miles distant from Hippo, yet 

*Vide Christ. Justell . Can. Ecc.'esife Africans, in Can. 56. Edit. 
Paris. 1614. 

fVideEpiphan. Ep. ad Johan. Hierosol. inter opera Hieron. Vol. 
2. Tom, 3. Fol. 71. Edit. Erasm. Basil. Item in Epiphanii Tom. 
2. page 312. Edit. Petav. Colon. 1682. 

JVide August, opera a Theoiog. Lovan. Edit. Colon. Agrip. 1616. 
Tom. 2. p. 325. Ep. 261. Fussala simul cont'gua sibi regione ad 

Paroeciam HipponensisEccles'se pertinebat. El infra, ab Hippone 

millibus quadraginta sejungitur. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 29 

both the place itself and the country round about it, did 
before his time belong to the par&chia of his church of 
Hippo. And to come home to ours2lves, the venerable* 
Bede calls the diocese of Winchester by the same name, 
even when the whole province of the South Saxons did 
belong to it. And then whether the word diocese (so 
customarily used for secular districts and provinces in 
the empire,) were immediately adopted into the church 
or no, I think it argues little; since when it was received, 
church- writers themselves made no scruple to use both 
dioecesis and jiarochia oftentimes as terms synonymous in 
sundry ages and nations where diocesan districts were 
established, which makes it plain enough that it was not 
with reference to circuit or extent of churches, that they 
used either, till later settlements gave more appropriated 
senses to them, as in sundry other ecclesiastical terms 
it is obvious enough to be observed and seen. But then, 

Thirdly, The very signification of the word Ttapouci* 
our learned author will assure us, does make all clear : 
For it signifies (says hef ) a dwelling one by another, as 
neighbors do, or an habitation in one and the same place. 
But here I must take leave to say, and I hope shall prove it 
too, that it is taken in a very different sense by writers of 
unquestionable authority, and by glossaries and crit- 
ics in the Greek language is sufficiently warranted to 
be so. 

The inquisitive $uicer% in his first observation on the 

* fc Provincia Australium Saxonum ad civitatis Venlauas parochiam 
pertinebat. Bede Eccl. Hist. 1. 5. c. 19. 

i Ibid. p. 16. 
J Suicerin vocib. napQuciu & UapoiKta, UapoiKiu) significat Advena 
peregrinus sum, & opponitur rw koJoik-iv, quod, juxta veteres Glossas, 
Habito, incolo. 



30 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

word napoiwo, lenders it by the Latin, [Advena, or Pere 
grinus sum] that is, (as the inspired penmen, I shewed you 
before, always use it in the Holy Scriptures) lama stran- 
ger or foreigner in any place. But this is not all; he adds 
immediately, that this word is put in direct opposition 
to kclIoikuv, which, according to ancient glosses, says he, 
signifies to dwell, or have an habitation in anyplace: And 
is this any thing more or less, than downright opposition 
to our learned Enquirer's peremptory interpretation of 
it? And what this judicious glossary does thus affirm, 
he makes good by the unexceptionable authorities of* 
Philo Judseus,*)* St. Basil the Great,:): Theodoret, and oth- 
ers whose particular quotations you have here noted in 
the margin, which make it clearer still. 

I am sensible, it may be alleged, that the Greek prep- 
osition, [rapa] when joined in composition with another 
word, as it is here, does often signify the same as [ juxta] 
with the Latins, that is, nigh, or near to any place. And 
this I take to be the sole motive indeed, that induced our 
learned author to make this positive construction of the 
word* But let§ Devarius (that accurate critic in the 
particles of the Greek tongue) be heard in this case; and 
he will teach us, that we cannot, with any authority, at- 
tribute such a determinate sense to it: For his note upon 
it is this, « ™pa (says he) non solum r ° tyyvs sed etiam rS ™P a 
£ «fr> significat; that is, the preposition ™p& does not only 

* Philo Judaes de Sacrif. Abel & Cain. O tois lyw/cXio/j povots 
txavixw irapoiKii co^ia, y koJoikh. 

t Basil, m. in Ps . 14 1. 1. p 149. H -rrapoucta fj-t Staywyrj rrposKaipos. 

£ Theodoret. in Ps. 119, p 911 . liapoiKiav kcl\u ttjv tv ttj aWolpta 
faaywyijv, 

$Vide Matth. Devarii, lib. de Graec. iEnig. particul. Edit, du 
Gard. A.D. 1657. page 20G. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 31 

signify nigh, or near to, but also beyond, or from abroad, 
and without, according to the different phrase or authors 
we may meet it in; which sufficiently justifies the above- 
mentioned ancient writer's using it (even in this very 
word before us) in direct opposition to that of dwelling 
nigh one another in one and the same place. 

But too much of this; for I ever took criticism to be a 
slender way of arguing in so great a subject as this is; 
only I found no help for it here, the determination was 
so positive in the case, and such smooth insinuations ad- 
vanced upon the plausibility of a single word. 

To pass then from words to things; that if the bare 
name does not satisfy, we may, at least, by some following 
observations of matter of fact, consent to his main asser- 
tion, That a* bishop's diocess and a modem parish were 
the same, as in name, so in thing: That is, let scripture, 
fathers, and history, say what they will of the numerous 
conversions wrought by the blessed apostles themselves, 
by their inspired fellow-laborers and successors in the 
ministry of the Gospel, either in Jerusalem, Judea, or 
throughout the heathen world; yet the utmost result of 
ail their labors amounted to no more, for 300 years to* 
gether, than just to such a competent society of believers, 
as could be enclosed within the walls of a single oratory, 
in any of the largest cities upon earth, (including the ad- 
jacent territories too.) 

I wish our learned author had begun his proof of this, 
where the church itself began, and had thought Jerusalem 
(the mother-church of all) as worthy of his notice as 
any of the rest, and scripture evidence as fit to be consid- 
ered, as other authorities he is pleased to use. But he 

•Enq. p. 17, 



32 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

has cautiously declined both one and the other : For in 
his three first chapters, wherein the whole parochial 
scheme is finished, we find but* one slight reference to 
Holy Writ, and that of no importance to the case, nor 
any text so much as named at all; and amongst all the 
particular churches he chose to treat of, (which are pret- 
ty many) that of Jerusalem (which the whole College of 
apostles jointly sounded, as it were a model for the rest) 
is not so much as named. Was this for want of matter, 
can we think, suitable to the subject of his enquiry there? 
or rather, that the stream of evidence ran too strong a- 
gainst his whole hypothesis in them both? Is it so obvi- 
ous to common sense, as not to deserve a little notice, and 
plainer explication of it, in his way, how the many thou- 
sands from time to time converted in Jerusalem alone, 
and the daily increase of them, (as it is specified in the 
' texts here noted in the margin)* should commodiously, 
or indeed possibly worship God in one and the same 
place together, since they neither had the capacious tem- 
ple, (to be sure) or any other place, that should be too 
much taken notice of, to hold such a numerous, and in- 
deed unconceivable assembly in? And yet St. James,^ 

* Chap. 1, page 11. 

t Acts i. 15. The number of the names together were about 120. 
Actsii; 41. There, were added to them about SC00 souls. Ver." 47 t 
tb« Lord added daily to the church such as should be saved Acts iv. 4. 
(Peter and John preacrTng afterwards upon healing of thecripple) Ma- 
ny of them which heard, believed ; and the number of men was about 
5000 Acts. v. 14. believers were the more added to the Lord both 
of men and women. Acts vi. 7. still the word of God increased, and 
iho number of disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great 
company of the priests were obedient to the faith. 

J: Oftf/)itt ofcX^i XQCou Mvpiddts inrcv Uiaiwv rwv ttiiti$9vkq']»9. Acta 
xxi.20. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 33 

(the bishop of this church himself) in a few years after, 
calls those thousands of converted Jews by the multipli- 
ed number of myriads of them, Acts xxi. 20. 

The inspired penmen, who relate all this, had little rea- 
son to record in sacred writ, or to amuse posterity with 
the number, method, or nature of the churches, oratories, 
or meeting-houses, (call them what we please) wherein 
those multitudes of blessed converts held assemblies for 
the offices and mysteries of their new religion, (\ho y their 
breaking bread from house to house, the churches men- 
tioned in private arid particular houses, there are no im- 
perfect intimations of it, whatever other interpretations 
may be forced upon them.) But, be that as it will, the 
matter of fact which they tell us, commands our faith ; 
and if common sense and reason can contract such num- 
bers into a single congregation, all their other writings, 
I am afraid, will feel the dangerous effect of such an ex- 
traordinary sort of commenting upon them. 

Tertullian says more than all this still, and that of 
everyplace in general too : * The numbers of Chris, 
tians, in his early age, were well nigh the greater part 
of every city ; for so he frankly tells the persecuting 
Scapula, who was not to be jested with. And again, to 
all the Roman Magistrates, in his apology, he glories in 
the multitudes of his profession, thus: f We are of yes- 

*Tanta hominum mvJtitudo, pars pcene major cujusq; civitatis 
Term], ad Scap. c. 2. p. 86. 

f Hesterni sumus, et vestra omnia 'implevimus; urbes, insujas, cas- 
teila, municipia, conciliabula, castra ipsa, tribus, decurias. jtalatium 
senatum, forum ; sola vobis veliquimus templa, Tertul. Apo!. p. 33, 
cap. 37. Si tanta vis hominum in aiiquem crbis remoti sinuin abru- 

pissemus a vobis pioculdubio expavissetis ad solitudinem ves- 

tram. ad silentium rerum, et stupoiem quendam quasi mortui oibis. 
Id. lb. 

4 



34 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

terday, (says he) yet everyplace is filled with us, your cities, 
the islands, the forts, your corporations, the councils, the 
armies, the tribes and companies; yea, the palace, senate, 
and courts of justice; your temples only have we left you 
free. Should we go off and separate from you, you would 
stand amazed at your own desolation, be affrighted at the 
stop and deadness of affairs amongst you; and you would 
have more enemies than subjects left you. An incompre- 
hensible account, sure! if the biggest city in the empire 
had no more than a single congregation in it. 

Let me add a hint or two from the excellent Eusebius 
to the same purpose here: That accurate historian, 
when he speaks in general of the primitive Christian 
Churches in every city and country, about the close of 
the apostolic age, uses such singular terms to express 
the multitudes and numbers of them, *as, any impartial 
reader must needs confess, do rather denote them to be 
hosts and legions, than any such thing as mere Parochial 
assemblies. His words are hardly to be rendered in 
our own tongue; for the greatest number of thronged and 
crowded societies of them are an imperfect translation of 
his original, (as you may see it in the margin) and his 
comparison for them is this, that they were like heaped 
grain upon a barn-floor It is strange, if so exact an au- 
thor as this should strain for such superlative words as 
these are, to describe only a common congregation by. 
Yet thus he represents (we see) the state of Christian 
Churches at the entrance, as it were, of that period of 
time to which our learned author all along appeals: And 
before he comes to the end of his third century, he con- 
futes, (I think) even to a demonstration, the whole hypo- 

* Kat &T)Ta ava iravaff iroXus ft kcli Kwpa$ nXrjtivwns a\u>vo$ ducvv ftvpiavtyoi 
*cu vaixir\v9us aBpow uacXnciai cvvisnKicav . — Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 1. 2, c. 3. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 35 

thesis at once: For, speaking of the peaceful and blessed 
times that Christians enjoyed after the Valerian persesu- 
tion ended, and before the Dioclesian began, which was 
the last 40 years of the third century; Who can describe 
(says he) *the innumerable increase and concourse of them? 
the numbers of assemblies in each city? and the extraordi- 
nary meetings in their houses of prayer? So that not con. 
tent with the buildings they had of old, they founded new 
and larger churches throughout every city: Which agrees 
directly with what Optatusf (the holy bishop of Milevis) 
tells us, that when Dioclesian destroyed the Christian 
Churches, (which was but five years after the third cen- 
tury at the most) there were above forty Basilica, that 
is, public places for Christian worship, in the single city 
of Rome. When were these forty Churches built, or 
dedicated to this holy use? None of them, can we ima- 
gine, so much as five or six years before? Had the 
Christians enjoyed forty years of peace and favor with 
the emperors, just at that time, and not provided so much 
as two or three such houses of God for their solemn as- 
semblies, and yet had occasion for forty of them and, 
actually had them too, before the fatal edict was issued 
out, that levelled them all to the ground? I leave the 
reader to decide the probability of this: And that the 
city of Rome was not singular in this case, I believe any 
reasonable man would easily agree. 

Neocsesarea, (we know) the famed metropolis of Cap- 

* IIco? S* av ng oiaypa-^us Tag fxvpiavSpag iKiivag smcrvvayuyag ; Kai ra 
ir\rj6r) ttjv Kara. -Kacav ro\iv aOpoicnaJuv Tag ts emvrjuug %v Toig rpogtVKjijpiois 
cvvSpofiag; wv 6rj tvZKa fj.r]Sa[xo)g ctl Toig -xaXaioig oiKoSofxjjjjiaai aKpupivoL tvptag 
ug 7rXaro? ava iraaag rag iroXttg %k 6r][x?\io)v avtfwv E^/cX^ata?, — Euseb. His. 
Eccl, 1. 8, C 1. 

+ Optat. de Schism. Donat. 1. 2. p. 39. 



36 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

padocia, was long before this as happily stored, as Rome 
itself proportionally could be, with such Christian ora- 
tories for the exercise of their religion: For when their 
Apostolical Bishop St. Gregory had converted that whole 
city (save only 17 persons) by the mighty hand of God 
upon him, the zealous citizens pulled down their altars, 
temples, and idols, and in every place built houses of 
prayer in the name of Christ in the room of them. The 
venerable father of the Church, who relates this, lived 
in the fourth century indeed, which our strict Enquirer, 
*I know, would in no case have concerned himself in 
this matter: But since it is only an historical matter of 
fact, and that within his own period of time too, I hope 
so unexceptionable an author as St. Gregoryf Nyssen 
may be allowed to bear witness to it. Though I can 
scarce forbear taking notice upon this occasion, that all 
the glorious lights of the Chr.stian Church in the fourth 
and fifth centuries, whose names can scarcely be men - 
tioned without deference and veneration by any true sons 
of the Church, of Christ, must be wholly set aside, and 
(implicitly at least) stigmat zed with innovation, and 
prevaricating from the Evangelical Institution and Apos- 
tolical establishment of the Christian Church, to make 
way for this congregational scheme; which makes the 
sagacious author of the Enquiry before us, lay such strict 
injunctions (as in his preface he does) upon any that 
should consider his elaborate work, not to stir a hair's 
breadth from the third century of the Church; for to the 

* Bw/iwy n kcli hpwv Kai Ei^wXwv zv avlois avoTlcTpaiiixtvuv* llav'Jojv 6$ 
Kara tottov -iravja. 

f Kutclvftiss £ti tu) ovopaJiXpis-y vaug aviy-ipovjiov. Greg, Nyssen* in 
Vit.Thaumat. Tom. 3. p. 567. Paris Edit. 1638. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 37 

glorious Basils, Gregories, Chrysostome, Austin, or any 
of their contemporaries, he dares not appeal; knowing 
how notoriously the Catholic Church of God (then ac- 
knowledged in the world, and ever since) had dioceses 
and Churches of a very different constitution from his. 
This consideration, I verily believe, would a little affect 
some sort of modest men, but I leave it to themselves: 
And having briefly shewn you in what manner Scripture, 
Church. history, and ancient fathers, applaud the honour 
of God; and do justice to the blessed labours of the holy 
apostles, in setting forth the innumerable souls they gain- 
ed to God and his Church, in so little a compass of time; 
I shall now, without farther interruption, consider the 
important observations which bur learned Enquirer has 
made upon sundry passages in the writings of the primi- 
tive fathers, which have prevailed upon him to affirm, 
that there was no more than one single Congregational 
Church of Christians for three hundred years together in 
the greatest city in the world. 

He begins with Justin Martyr, and renders a passage 
in his first Apology, thus: On Sunday (says he) * All 
assemble together in one place. Now Justin's words are 
these: On Sunday all throughout cities or countries meet 
together; and why do we think he left out these words, 
{throughout cities or countries) which were in the very 
middle of the sentence? Why? because those words of 
the holy Martyr would undeniably shew it to be a gen- 
eral account of Christian practice in all places of the 
Christian world; whereas our Enquirer's business was 
to make it a particular instance of a single Bishop's 

* Enquiry, p. 17. Tlav'Jav ivi to av'Jo avvtXivais yivslai. Just. Mart. 
Apol. 1, p. 98, Justin's words are tlisse; Uavjuv Ka]a ttoXiis# aypst 
mtvovlwv tiri to avjo avvzXivvis yivi]ai. 

4* 



38 AN* ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

Diocese, and that all the members of it, both in city and 
country, met in one and the same place together at once; 
and if it were so, then cities and countries in the plural 
number would be too much for him; for if they proved 
any thing in that sense, they would prove that cities and 
countries, indefinitely taken, wherever there were any 
Christians in them, met all together every Sunday, and 
made but one congregation; and therefore the [aw evicts 
yiveTjat em axT\o ] which properly signifies, assembling togeth- 
er, though it is expressed in the singular number, yet 
being spoken with reference to a complex body, as it 
evidently is here in relation to cities and countries at 
large, does severally refer to each distinct member and 
part, whereof that complex body does consist; and plain- 
ly denotes, that every part, as well one as the other, did 
hold an assembly on that day, or else the same absurdity 
would unavoidably follow as before, that all made but 
one assembly in the whole, So unwarily (at least) are 
this holy martyr's words misrepresented here, to prove 
what they no wise do prove, or never intended to do. 

For the plain case was this; the pious apologist writes 
to the heathen emperor, senate, and people, in vindica. 
tion of the persecuted Christians throughout the Roman 
empire, and towards the close of his apology sets forth 
the general method of them all in the exercise of their 
religion; I say,. the general method of them all, for other- 
wise his charitable plea for that profession had been very 
lame and imperfect indeed, and contrary to the tenor of 
his whole apology, as is obvious to them that read it: 
So that his Sunday's assemblies here, were a specification 
of the Catholic practice, whether in cities or countries 
throughout the empire, as the plural words, observed 
above, do unquestionably imply; and forasmuch as they 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 39 

were aliens to the Christian dispensation, to whom he 
wrote, he neither used the peculiar word Bishop or Pres- 
byter, to express the president of their respective assem- 
blies by, (though our Enquirer frankly translates it by 
the former of these) but only such a * general term as 
might instruct the heathens he addressed it to, that a per- 
son in peculiar authority did preside over each of them, 
and principally discharge the duties of the assembly, and 
the day; and what does this prove as to the certainty of 
but one congregation only in any city or Diocese? 

His next appeal is to sundry passages in the epistles of 
St. Ignatius. The qotations are pretty many in number; 
but the force and importance of them all, I conceive, 
when you hear them, will appear to be much the same. 

To the Church of f Smyrna he writes thus: Where 
the Bishop is, there the people must be: And again, It is 
unlawful to do any thing without the Bishop. To the 
Trallians, thus:$ There is a necessity that we do nothing 
without the Bishop. And to the Philadelphians; § Where 
the Pastor is, there the Sheep ought to follow. And to the 
Magnesians, \\ As Christ, says he, did nothing without the 
Father, so do you nothing without the Bishop and Presby- 
ters, but assemble into the same place (so he renders '*** ** 
avTo without any other word joined to it;) that you may 
hare one Prayer, one Supplication, one Mind, and one 
Hope. 

* 'OTLoptstis' Just. Apol.ib. 

t Otth av (pavr) b l&irKrico-xos, iku to iAtjBos t^-io . Ovk t\ov t^iv xwpij 

nriGKorca htz ^airji^uv sn ayazrjv irouiv' Ep. ad Smyr. p. 6 . 

J Avayicaiov kv i?iv avzv ntiGKoita p.r}hv -npaaaiiv vfxag. Ep. ad. Tral- 
les. p. 48. 

§ Ottst Se 6 iroifirjv e?iv, e/c« wj -rcpoSa'Ja clkoXuSoIc . Ep. Philad. p. 42. 

|| Avev ru E7T(CK07ry Kat twv TLpss&vl tpwv prifov Trpaaatfjz aWa em ra- 
;j»7o [xta irpoc^xn put fot]<n% Its vu$ fiia e\ms . Ep. ad M agnes. p. 33. 



40 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

Now can any man see more in all this, than that the 
Bishop must be in all the ministrations of the Church, 
and none can rightly partake of any of them, but by 
him? But how? By his personal ministry alone? Yes; or 
else all our learned Enquirer's use and inference from 
them, will come to little indeed : But are we sure the ho- 
ly martyr himself meant so too? Nothing plainer, I 
think, than that he did not; else how could he say imme- 
diately before his charge to the Church of Smyrna, of 
doing nothing without the Bishop, * let that Eucharist be 
counted valid with you, (says- he) which is celebrated by 
your Bishop, or by such an one as he shall authorize to do 
it. And immediately after it again, as soon as he had 
told them, that without the Bishop, it was not lawful to 
baptize or solemnize their love-feast, (which implies com- 
munion too) he adds, as it were by way of exception; f 
But what he (that is, the Bishop) does approve, that is ac- 
ceptable unto God. The Bishop's permission and appro- 
bation (it seems then) were, in the holy martyr's sense, 
as good as his very act and deed. And no less is plain- 
ly to be seen in that great argument, by which he enjoins 
this dutiful regard to the Bishop, in his charge to the Mag- 
nesians; £ As the Lord (says he) did nothing of himself, 
or by his Apostles, without the Father; so neither do you 
without the Bishops and the Presbyters. In the relative 
part of this comparison, we see, what our Lord did either 
by himself, or his Apostles, (commissioned by him) are 
implied to be the same thing; and therefore, in the cor- 
relate which answers to it, what the Church should do by 

• Ejc«v?? peGaitt Eu%a/)t<r*a r,yzi(rQu J vtto tov EmaKonov Zaa % u> av tmjot 
tnlptipn. Ad Smyrn. p. 6. 

f AXA' Z av tKttvos Sokipatyi tsto kcu tu> Qsut tvapt^ov. lb, 

J 0*7« Si tavts BTt 8ia Ttav AttosJoXup Ep, ad Magnes. p. 33. 



THE TRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 41 

the ministry of the Bishop himself, or of the Presbyters 
commissioned by him, by a just analogy of sense should 
be the same too; and for this reason, perhaps, our cau- 
tious Enquirer, in quoting this passage in this place, left 
out the whole former part of this comparison in his ori- 
ginal in the margin, and these words, [by himself, or by 
his Apostles] in his translation of it in the text. I need 
not add, sure, how natural and undisputed a maxim it is, 
in all acts of government whatsoever, that the supreme 
magistrate is said and owned to do what is warrantably 
done by his commissioned ministers and authority; so 
little does St. Ignatius's language, in this sense, and in his 
own interpretation of it, differ from the ordinary dialect 
and notion of all mankind. 

That a Bishop, then, might and did so act by deputed 
Presbyters, I think is very clear in St. Ignatius's own 
sense of it; and this sort of deputation so nearly resem- 
bles even what we call institution in an Episcopal Church 
at this day, (at least as to the exercising of ministerial 
offices in it) that if the place, as well as office, were as- 
signed, I should scarce know what we did dispute about. 
And that those primitive Bishops could and did assign to 
Presbyters, as well a separate place or places to minister 
in, as depute them to the ministry itself, I can bring this 
very learned Enquirer himself to bear witness forme; for 
in the 38th and 39th pages of this very Treatise of his, 
(where he gives account of ihe populous Church of Alex- 
andria) he confesses, that because it was incommodious for 
all the people to assemble in their own usual meeting-place, 
which was very far from their own homes , and withal to 
avoid schism from their Bishop, the people asked leave, and 
the good Bishop Dionysius granted it, that they should erect 
a chappel of ease. He might have said chappels in the 



42 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

plural, if he pleased; for in the historian himself there is 
the * same authority for it; and this, about the suburbs of 
the city, and to be under the Buhotfs jurisdiction, and 
guided by a Presbyter of his commission and appointment.^ 
This passage (from Euseb. Hist, Eccl. I. 7. c. 11.) is 
represented in a very nice and arbitrary figure here, to 
suit the scheme it was produced for, as much as it could 
handsomely do; and yet how little it does so, nay, how 
directly it contradicts the whole, is obvious to any reader 
by the bare reciting of it. Here are several assemblies 
of Christians under the jurisdiction of one Bishop; sub- 
ordinate and accountable Presbyters, by permission and 
commission of that one Bishop, officiating separately in 
them; and distinct places assigned for their doing so. — 
Judge if this be like our Enquirer's Congregational Dio- 
cese, or can be reasonably opposed to a genuine Episco- 
pal one, even in after-ages of the Church, and down to 
these days of ours, if we will not still insist on bare 
names, and overlook things. 

His only Salvo is, that on solemn occasions they were all 
to assemble still in one Church, and icith their ens Bishop 
together, which neither Dionysius himself, nor the histo- 
rian from whence he quotes it, say any thing of; and yet 
we know indeed, that it was a customary, form, by which 
parochial Churches, for many ages together, used to tes. 
tify their union and dependence upon their several Cath- 
edrals; namely, to offer and communicate with them by 
proper representatives on the greater festivals of the year; 
and how much more than that, the Church of Alexandria 
ever did, (especially in St. Athanasius's time, from 

* Ka7a [xipos Zvvaywyai. Dionys. apud Euseb. 1. 7, c. 11. 
t See ray remarks on this passage at large, from page 9. to page 13„ 
iu the former chapter. 



THE PKIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 43 

whence, our author tells us, he could bring his proof) 
any man may pretty easily conceive; since that venera- 
ble father affirms, * that the whole region of Mareotis 
and all the Churches in it, belonged to the Bishop of 
Alexandria alone; that the Presbyters had their several 
portions of it, and each of them ten or more large vil- 
lages under their particular care. What sort of congre- 
gation this whole region, with all the Christians in the 
great city of Alexandria would make, I leave to any 
reasonable man to consider. 

Having thus explained this familiar phrase, then, of 
that primitive Martyr Ignatius, (That without the Bishop 
nothing should be done) in a sense which no ways war- 
rants the hypothesis it was quoted for; and that by the 
unexceptionable authority of the holy Martyr himself, 
and the very learned author's own concessions, who 
was here applying it to quite another end; I think there 
is no tittle in the fore-mentioned citations, that does not 
in course fall in with the same interpretation; unless per- 
haps he will say, that the particular phrases, 'e™ ™ M^ 
and v- ia a«7<Ks, will not consist with this; by the former 
of which, he concludes for certain, that the whole Di- 
ocese or Bishop's Church assembled in one place to- 
gether; by the latter, that all public prayer, and reli- 
gious duties, were so jointly performed too. 

But what necessity for this? do these words so evident* 
ly imply it, that the holy Father himself could have no 
other meaning in them? let the context direct us in the 
case; which, together with the sense, which approved 

* O MapswT77j %c5j3a ttjs AXi^avSpnag i$i* To) A\z%avdptiasEm<TROTru>i 
at EKKA^atat -Kaarji r/tfxwpas VKOKiLvrai. "Ekcistos twv TrpisSvrepojv t%u ra% 
aSius KWfias jxeytsros kcli api^^u fond ra kcli nXetovas. St. Athanas. Apol. 2, 
in Oper. vol. 1, p. 802, Edit. Colon. 1686. 



44 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

Commentators, and other Ecclesiastical writers, give us 
of the words themselves, will help us to a fair construc- 
tion of them. 

In the words immediately before these, the holy Mar- 
tyr warns the Magnesians * to account nothing for a rea- 
sonable service, that is done privately, or in their own 
private way. Agreeable, no doubt, to the Apostolical 
charge (Heb. x. 25.) that they should not forsake the as- 
sembling of themselves together, but meet for public wor- 
ship under the proper minister of their Church; to avoid 
schism and heterodox opinions, as he proceeds to explain 
himself presently after. Now, if it had been undeniably 
proved by any expressions before, that there neither 
was, nor ought to be, any more than one single house of 
prayer, or of public worship, within a Bishop's Diocese, 
and that his personal Ministry was absolutely necessary 
in all Divine offices; it might have been fairly inferred 
indeed, that they were all obliged to assemble with him, 
in that one individual place alone: But since the holy 
Martyr himself had informed us elsewhere, that the most 
solemn offices of public worship were valid in themselves, 
and acceptable to God too, when performed by any per- 
son whom the Bishop should authorize and approve of 
for it; fas we have seen before he did) sure, if any parti- 
cular number or society of members in that Diocese had 
assembled for public worship, under any Presbyter so 
allowed and commissioned by him to officiate for them, 
they had answered the full import of the holy Martyr's 
charge here given them, against private and clandestine 
ways of worshiping; or else I cannot see how the Bishop's 
approbation and permission of such a person could be to 

* Mtj&i irttpa<T7]JiTov\oyov n faivisdai idiavjuv. Ad Magnes. p. 33. 



THE PRIMITIVE CKTJIICII, &.C. 45 

any purpose at all. Nay, if the same Presbyter by vir- 
tue of such permission, could not minister in places dif- 
ferent from their Bishop's Church, or Cathedral of his 
Diocese too; our learned author's chappel of ease as he 
calls it, in the Alexandrian Church had been no better 
than a schismatical conventicle, at the least. So little 
can it be inferred from St. Ignatius's phrase in this place, 
that he confined a Diocese to a single congregation. 

But let us see what construction impartial Commenta- 
tors, and other Ecclesiastical writers, have made of this 
phrase, Ed tu dvro- to whose observations I shall only 
premise this short and general key to them all; that as 
the phrase itself does, by no grammatical construction 
whatsoever, so much denote v.vlace^ as it dees a thing in 
general, according to the known rule of all such neutral 
words as this is; so in the instances I shall mention, you 
will find it is accordingly taken and understood by them 
al!. 

Thus the learned Grctius. explaining this E^d dv-b m 

Acts iii. I. he only translates it in these words, Circa 
idem iempus, that is, about the same time. And in Beza's 
translation of the New Testament, the note and para- 
phrase upon it, Acts ii. 44. is this; that * the common 
assemblies of the Churchy with their mutual agreement in 
the, same doctrine and, the great unanimity of their hearts 
icerc signified by ii. Agreeable to which construction of 
it, is what we meet with in the Greek translations of 
Psal. xxxiv. 3. where that which the Septuagint ren- 
der e™ t ° av ™, by Aquila is translated, (tyo$upa&v, that is, 
with one mind, and one heart: And I need not remind 

• Ita communes Ecclesiae ccetus significantur cum nsutua in canciem 
doctrinam consensione, et summa animorum concordia. Not. ad 
Eez. in Act. ii. 44. Vid. etiam Poli Svnops, in Act. ii, 44. 
5 



46 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

the reader of what we just now observed, that in Justin 
Martyr's use of the phrase, it could not be understood in 
the sense that our learned Enquirer here puts upon it, 
without the gross absurdity of bringing the christians of 
whole cities and countries together into one and the same 
individual place at once. Acts iv. 26, 27. Herod, Pilate, 
the Gentiles, and people of Israel were gathered against 
Christ lb,} to avrd, were they all in one place, and at one 
time together? 

How concluding that argument must then be, which 
proceeds upon a positive interpretation of a single phrase, 
that is indefinite in its own nature, and determined to 
signify otherwise by authors of no mean character in 
the learned world, and is not suitable to the author's own 
notions, from whence it is taken, neither; I shall not need 
to observe. 

But is it possible, you will say, that [tiairpotvxh and 
fila bivcis, that is, one prayer and one supplication for a 
whole church, should be consistent with this plurality of 
congregations? 

Let us see what we mean by it; and then, it is likely, 
we shall argue clearer about it. For if it should appear 
by the nature of the thing itself, and by the use and ap- 
plication which St. Ignatius makes of it, that it can con- 
sist so; that is all, I thing, can be required in it. 

Now, from the nature of the think itself, it is clear, 
that prayer must be one, either in respect of the phrase 
and words it is uttered or delivered in; or in respect of 
the sense and substance, the heads or subject matter of 
which it is composed: That is, it must he one, either in 
respect of the matter, or in respect of the form of it; for 
io say it must be one here, upon the account of admitting 
but one place or one person in a Diocese to offer it up, is 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 47 

to beg the question, which it is brought to prove; and 
therefore unity in either of the other senses, if it agrees 
with the holy Martyr's sense too, is the fair account 
of it. 

Now, that it is not meant to be one, in the former 
sense, relating to the words or phrase of it, I suppose will 
readily be granted; for that would make the holy Father 
plainly to prescribe a stinted form, or mere common 
liturgy in the Church; which our gifted congregational 
Bishops, I conceive, would scarce allow. And there- 
fore, secondly, it must be understood to be one, in respect 
of the sense and substance of it; or in plainer terms, it 
must be prayer made with strict analogy to the one 
common faith, and sound doctrine of the one Catholic 
Church throughout the Christian world, as every true 
Christian prayer necessarily ought to be: And in no 
other sense than this, is it conceivable, I think, how even 
a single Bishop in a congregational Church, could be 
said to offer up this ^ la Siv^s or one prayer with his 
people, which is here enjoined, who affects, as often as 
they meet together, to alter the phrase and language of 
his devotion for them. 

And that this was St. Ignatius's meaning in it, we may 
reasonably infer, first, from the words he immediately 
joins with it, one prayer, one supplication, (says he) one 
mind, and one hope; the two latter words imply a plain 
unity in them, and yet have so diffusive a sense, as to 
extend to all the congregations of the Catholic Church; 
and therefore why not the two former too? And, 
secondl}'-, we may infer it also from the use he was then 
making of it; which, as I hinted before, was directly to 
secure them from schismatical conventicles, and hereti- 
cal notions; and since the Bishop himself was to approve 



48 AN OSIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

as we have seen St. Ignatius himself allowed him to do, 
of any minister whatsoever that should officiate for them, 
and thereby reserve to himself the inspection, visitation, 
and censure of them, which is a natural consequence of 
it, whatsoever prayer the people of his Diocese should 
join in, with such a commissioned and approved Presby- 
ter as this, could never bring them into that danger of 
schism the holy Martyr here warned them against; but 
being orthodox, and as conformable to Christian faith and 
doctrine, as the Bishop's own could be, would, in the 
true sense of the primitive Father, and to the great 
end for which ho intended it, bo that pi a $in<n$, that one 
prayer, which the Bishop and ail his Diocese were to 
offer up to God. 

And that this was a true notion of the unity of prayer 
in the primitive Churches, Tertullian would satisfy us, if 
we would allow him to speak only what he could justify 
and make good, in his apology for all the Christians in 
the Roman Empire: For, though we have no reason to 
believe that he frequented many more congregations than 
that single one to which he belonged, as other Christians 
did; yet he takes the freedom to declare to the Roman 
Magistrates, what kind of prayer the Christian Churches 
used in general, how innocent their petitions were, and 
frankly mentions several particulars of them, by way of 
upbraiding them all for persecuting subjects that lived 
and prayed so loyally and harmlessly as they did. * If 
he could do this without some common liturgies, then at 
least, in use amongst them, or some known canon of the 
Ministerial offices; surely, it could be upon no other 

* Oramus pro Trnperatoribus, pro ministris eorum, ac potestatibn?, 
pro statu seculi, pro rerum quiete, pro mora finis. Ten. Apol. c, 
39. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 49 

grounds than this, that he was sure the Christian Chur- 
ches prayers were one, and the same, in all places, in 
the sense we are now speaking; that is, they were bound 
to bear a strict analogy to that one creed, that one and 
the same system of Christian doctrine, and that one di- 
vine model of all prayer, which our blessed Lord deliver- 
ed to them, and every one of them were known to be 
guided by. Other fathers, as ancient or ancienter than 
Tertullian, speak in the same manner with him. But on 
this head, I think, there needs no more. 

To proceed then : The Bishop, * says our learned 
author, had but one alter, or communion-table, in his whole 
Diocese, at which his whole flock received the sacrament 
from him, and that at one time. For proof of this, he 
offers those words of St. Ignatius to the Philadelphians; 
f There is but one altar, as but one Bishop. To explain 
which phrase, I shall use our % Enquirer's own method, 
by joining to it a parallel expression of the admirable 
St. Cyprian; which is so near a kin to it, that it seems 
almost a mere translation of it; at least, it is a most direct 
and immediate illustration of it. St. Cyprian's words 
are here in the margin: Our Enquirer renders them 
thus; § No man can regularly constitute a new Bishop, 
or erect a new altar, besides the one Bishop and the one 
altar. And here I am sorry I must remark a fatal over- 
sight; for I am loth to give even this unjust translation 
another name, but it is evident, what St. Cyprian here 

* Enquiry, p. ]8, 19. 

t Ev Svotawpiov, ws us irnvKOTros, &Zc. Ep. ad Phiiadelp. p. 41. 

f Enq. p. 21. 

$ Aliud altare constitui,; aut Sacerdotium novum fieri, praeter un- 
um altare & unum Sacerdotiura, non potest. Cypr. Ep, 40. $ 4. Edit. 
Pamel. ep.43, Edit. Oxon, 
5* 



50 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

calls a new priesthood, and one priesthood, our learned 
Author renders by a new Bishop and one Bishop; which 
proves, indeed, that he believed it a directly parallel 
place to that of St. Ignatius, as it really is, because he 
translates both in the very same words. But, in the 
mean time, he so disguises this holy father's text, that he 
hides from the English reader's sight the main key 
which would open the genuine sense and meaning of this, 
and all such expressions as these are; not only in these 
two venerable Fathers alone, but in all the writings of 
primitive antiquity besides: For the unity of the altar, 
the unity of the bishop, the unity of the Eucharist, the 
unity of Christian prayer, and the very unity of the 
whole Church itself, are all founded upon the common 
bottom that the unity of the Christian Priesthood is; and 
no man ever so unlocked the evangelical secret of this 
Catholic and Christian unity, as the unimitable St. 
Cyprian has done. So that if his short and plain, but 
admirable account of it, were but duly weighed and 
credited, as it ought to be, we should hear but few en- 
quiries after the constitution of the primitive Church, 
few amusements about the fundamental unity of it, drawn 
only from a scattered sentence, here and there, in the 
most uniform records of the best and ancientest writers in it. 
St. Cyprian's brief account of it lies in that noted pas- 
sage, so familiar to all who ever read his works, or al- 
most ever heard his name: * Episcopacy, says he,* in his 

* Episcopates est unus, cujus a' singulis in solid urn pars tenetur. — 
Ecclesia quoq; unna est, quoe in multitudlnem latius incremento 
frecunditatisextenditur; quo modo solis multi radii, sed lumen unura r 
&c. Numerositas licet diffusa videatur equndantis copiae largitate, 
anitas tamen servaturin origine. Cypr. de Unit. Eccl. p. 108. Edit. 
Oxon. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCII, &C. 51 

small tract of the unity of the Church, is but one; a pari 
whereof each [Bishop] holds, so as to be interested for the 
whole. The Church is also one, which by its fruitful in- 
crease improves into a multitude, as the beams of the sun 
are many, as branches of trees, and streams from a foun- 
tain; whose number, though it seems dispersed by the abun- 
dant plenty of them, yet their unity is preserved by the 
common original of them all. Apply this plain rule to 
all sorts of unities mentioned here; and see first, if the 
primitive expressions of one Church, one Altar, and one 
Bishop, do not evidently consist with as many Churches, 
Altars, and Bishops, as can be proved to be undeniably 
derived from one and the same original institutor: The 
unity of whose Divine power and Spirit, diffused at first 
amongst the chosen twelve, stamps a character of unity 
upon all who regularly descend from them, and upon 
every individual, who only claims under, and owns his 
authority from, and his dependence upon such as them: 
Nay, the unity of sundry prayers too, as I have shewn 
before, by the same analogy of reason, may be owned to 
be such, if they all center, as to the substance of them in 
that original model which the Divine Author of Christian 
prayer first delivered in to us; those common articles 
of faith and doctrine which he obliged us all to; provided 
they be offered up by a person duly-authorized for such 
ministerial offices in the Church. Nor will the ministra- 
tion of the blessed eucharist by divers hands, or at sun- 
dry tables, though within the same particular Diocese 
still, differ any thing from the rest, if duly warranted by, 
and kept accountable to, the first and principal minister 
of that holy ordinance, who is the rightful Bishop of the 
whole flock. The plurality of eucharists is thus made 
one throughout all the united provinces and Dioceses of 



52 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

the Catholic Church; because in the gradual progress 
of the Church, from the beginning, both Bishops and 
presbyters do all claim a power of commission to conse- 
crate from one another, till they rise up to the blessed 
Apostles themselves, and they from Christ alone. 

And thus St. Ignatius' Chatholic phrase, of one altar; 
one Bishop, and the like, does no more prove the neces- 
sity of but one communion-table in a primitive Bishop's 
Diocese, than it would do in the most extensive one of 
this or any former ages, or in the largest patriarchal 
province that was ever settled in the Church, provided ev- 
ery one who ministered at each of them had a just com- 
mission from their orthodox superiors for doing so: But 
what is otherwise than so, is altar agaist altar indeed, 
and no less than formal schism. Let us take care then, 
not to draw up forces as * St. Ignatius' words import, 
against the Bishop, if we mean not to withdraw our sub- 
jection from God, 

By this account the reader will see what the ancients 
truly meant, when they called a schismatical usurpa- 
tion of the Episcopal Power, by the name of a profane 
altar; which yet our learned enquirer urges again and 
again, as a fair argument to prove, that there could be no 
more than one single congregation in a whole Diocese, 
though the ministers of a second, or third, are more, 
should never so much agree with the Bishop himself in 
all his principles and ministrations, and be even author- 
ized and approved of by him; as f St. Ignatius expressly 
tells us, a Bishop might so authorize and approve him; 

* ErsiWw/xsv ftrj avJi^aacnaQai to> Eitioxottw iva tjjxcv Ola vicoraotroptvoi*- 
Ad Ephes. p, 20. 
i Slav ou7o? iinl^-^7}. Ad Smyrn. p. 6. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 53 

in which cass they were so far from being thought a 'pro- 
jane altar, that they were truly owned to be but one and 
the same. 

Next to the one only communion-table, our author 
proceeds to prove the sacond part of his main proposition, 
that all the people of t.'u Diocese received together at 
once. His authorities for that are only two.- First, from 
St. Cyprian, whose words he quotes and represents in 
the f ,rm of a direct and positive proposition, thus: * We 
celebrate the sacrament, the irhole brotherhood being pre- 
sent. This is pretty near the author's words, I confess; 
but his application of them to the whole flock of a Dio- 
cese, either of St. Cyprian himself, or of any other Bish- 
op, is very hard to be gathered from them in the place 
where I find them lie. The case was this: f St. Cyprian 
was complaining to Csecilius of some persons in some 
places, who either out of ignorance, or simplicity of 
heart, celebrated the holy Eucharist with water only in 
the chalice, without wine; the zealous Bishop is full of 
argument and resentment against them: What! (says he) 
are they afraid the heathen should discover them in 
their morning sacrifices by the smell of wine? What 
will they do in time of persecution, if they are so asham- 
ed of the blood of Christ in the very offerings themselves? 
Or do many of them excuse themselves thus, that though 
water only was offered in the morning, yet when they 
come to supper, they offer a mixed cup then? [I shall 
not amuse my reader with what the learned may say 
about their taking the Eucharist thus in the morning, 

* Ut sacrament i veritatem fratemitate orani praecente celebremus,. 
Cyp. Ep. 63. Edit. Oxon. 1631. Amstel . 

f Quoniam quidam vei ignoranter, vel simpliciter in calice domfn- 
ico sanntificando & plebi ministrando, non hoc facuint, quod Jesus 
Christus sacrificli kuj us auctor — fecit, &c«Cypr. ib. sub init. 



54 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

and completing it in the evening, or about any other 
sense that may be given of it; it is foreign to our case] 
but * the words are plain: To which St. Cyprian re- 
plies, but when we sup, says he, we cannot call the 
people to our feast, that we might celebrate the truth of 
the sacrement, namely in a mixed cup, as it ought to be, 
with all the brotherhood about us. This is the occasion 
then of the words. In which it is easy to observe, 

1st. That they refer not at all to St. Cyprian in per- 
son, or possibly to any in his Diocese, though in the 
name of Christians in general, he says, that we might cel- 
ebrate the sacrement aright, &c. or if they did refer to 
him, they would demonstrate that he had more congre- 
gations than one in his Church; for in his own Cathedral, 
to be sure, he did not minister so, or else he reasoned very 
strangely indeed. 

2d. It is plain that all the brotherhood here is put in 
opposition to the Christians in their private families, 
which I think with sufficient propriety of speech might 
be said, if he meant only all the Christian brethren that 
used to meet in their own particular oratory together for 
public worship, though there were twenty other such 
like oratories as those, united together with them under 
one common Bishop, to make up a Diocesan Church; for 
certainly, what any private men should do in their own 
houses now a days, which ought to be done in their par- 
ish Church, might very properly be reproved, by saying, 
they ought to have done it when all the brotherhood came 
together. 

3d. I might observe what an useful turn our ingenious 
author gave to this quotation, by translating it with that 

* See the same, 63. Ep. $ 7. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &.C. 55 

insensible variation; ice do celebrate, instead of, that we 
miglxt celebrate; which made it directly St. Cyprian's act 
and deed in his own Diocese, and gave no occasion to 
imagine, that there could be any other possible meaning 
in it, than very plainly so. 

Lay these few things together, and judge what an 
irrefragable argument this must be, to prove that no 
primitive Bishop whatsoever, and particularly St. Cyp- 
rian himself, did ever minister the blessed sacrament; but 
that every soul under his respective Episcopal cure, who 
communicated at all, were always present with him, 
which was the thing it was brought to prove; nor has our 
learned author any one authority more here, to prove 
this grand point of his general proposition, but barely the 
repetition of Justin Martyr's Sunday assemblies again, 
where all in cities and countries, he says, met in one place, 
which I conceive I have shewn already, to contain an 
irreconcilable inconsistency in it, and that it proves no 
such thing. 

But to make all sure, he * tells us, the Christians, in 
Tertullian's time and country, received the sacrement of 
the Lord's Supper from the hands of the Bishop alone, f 
But how do we know that Tertullian's presidents in this 
place, for that is his word, as you see in the margin, 
were the Bishops only? Now, as far as our Enquirer 
can assure us of it, you may find in page 67, of this tract 
of his; where we read, that president was one discretive 
appellation of a Bishop; and yet St. Cyprian, says he, 
calls his Presbyters, Presidents too: May not we be very 
well assured then, do you think, that Tertullian, whom 

* Enquiry, p. 19. 

f Nee de aliorum manu quam Pnesidentium sumimus. T«rt. de 
Core- n. Mil. p. 121. Edit. Rigalt. Lutetiae, 1641. 



56 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT 01? 

St. Cyprian familiarly called his master, could meaft 
nothing else by his Presidents, but Bishops of a Diccese 
alone, since his great disciple, St. Cyprian, thought no 
such thing of it? At least, would not one think, that our 
ingenious author should satisfy his reader a little with 
some certain note here, that in this passage of Tertulhan, 
it could be meant no otherwise, since he himself had made 
that observation for us? But to be short, and to give a 
fair account of the scope of that passage in Tertullian; 
it was thus: Tertullian was contending for the authority 
of tradition for many common rites then used in tho 
Christian Church, without a Scripture warrant for them. 
* Amongst these customs, he instances a general prac- 
tice in the Church then, to communicate in the morning, 
different from the time of the institution itself; and togeth- 
er with that, this which we are now speaking of } that 
they received the communion from the President's hands 
alone; both equally common in his days in the Christian 
Church; which, to make as clear an interpretation of it 
as we can, I think implies neither more nor less than 
this, that as the sacrament was then generally adminis- 
tered in the morning, so wherever it was administered, 
tho consecrated elements were usually delivered to tho 
communicants, as it is indeed most in use now, by the 
hands of them only, who presided in the several assem- 
blies where those holy exercises were performed; that is, 
I humbly conceive, by the officiating ministers f them- 
selves. And what appearance of proof there is in all 

* EucharistiaB Sacramentum, et in tempore victus, et omnibus 
rcandatum a Domino, etiam antelucanis eoetibus, nee rie aliorum 
mann,quam Prsssicientium sumimus. Tertul. lb. 

J- Whereas in many Places, as Justin Martyr tells us, the Deacon* 
sised to do it. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 57 

this, for a Bishop's personally distributing the blessed 
elements to every communicant in his whole Diocese, at 
one time and in one place; I desire the words and context 
may be sifted, and I should willingly set down by the 
reader's judgment of it. 

Well! but the Bishop alone, generally, * says he, bap- 
tized all in his Diocese. How much the word generally 
implies, I need not overnicely enquire: He himself, 
again, gives me an easier solution of it; for (Page 55.) he 
tells us from the same Tertullian, that the Bishop hath 
the right of baptism, and then the presbyters and deacons-, 
but for the honor of the Church, not without the Bishop' } s 
authority. 

I shall observe no more at present from this quotation, 
than this; that the presbyters and deacons might baptize 
in the Diocese, if the Bishop allowed them to do it; as St. 
Ignatius (we know before) admitted that baptism to be 
acceptable to God, which the Bishop should approve; so 
that the whole of the matter, it seems, is this, that the 
Bishop, with'his presbyters and deacons, must baptize all 
in the Diocese; and this is offered as a reason, that a 
Diocese must be no more than a Congregational Church, 
because the Bishop could not otherwise do all; for as for 
his generally doing it, that is our Enquirer's own; neither 
quotation has a tittle of it. 

I confess, that contestation mentioned here, which was 
the renunciation form, which all adult catechumens used 
in their own persons, to testify their forsaking the devil, 
the pomp, &c. before they actually were baptized; it is 
probable, and possible enough too, it might be in the 
presence of the Bishop himself, and the Diocese have a 

* Enquiry, p. 21. Sub Antistite contestamur nos renunciare Dia- 
bolo et pompae. Tertul. de Coron. Mil. c. 3. p. 121. nx supra. 
6 



58 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

sufficient plurality of congregations in it too; * since it 
was a very large space of time, as Tertullian expresses 
it, which was set apart for this very ordering of baptism 
every yeaf, even the fifty days, from easterfo whitsontide, 
including the festivals, as you will see, his account of it, 
in the margin, shews. 

It is a hard task to attend such minute particulars, 
when I have produced before, such general rules, as might 
answer all at once: But I am willing to please. He tells 
us farther then, that Justin Martyr assures us, j* The 
Bishop was common curator, and overseer, of all the or- 
phans, widows, diseased] in a word, of all that were needy 
and indigent; and thence infers, that the Diocese could 
not be very large, where the Bishop personally relieved 
them all. Now, the seeming force of this argument does 
not lie in Justin Martyr's words, but in the discreet man- 
ner of wording the inference from them, with a little help 
in the translation: The holy Martyr said just before, 
that ihe collection of the people's alms was deposited in 
their president's hands, and immediately subjoins, that he 
took care to relieve all kind of distressed persons, there 
mentioned, and out of the offerings, to be sure, that were 
so entrusted with him. Our Enquirer infers, that he 
personally did this; by which he would have us under- 
stand, that all whom the Church's charity relieved, the 

* Diem baptismo solennem pascha praestat exinde Pentecoste, 
ordinances lavatTis.latissimum spatium est, quo et domini Kesurrectio 
inter djscipylos frequentata est. Tertu!. de Bapt . c. 19 . Edit. Rigal . 
Lutet, 1641. 

* To cvWiyoiiivov rrapa rw Ilpoi^um airo'JiOiTai Kai avros tttiKupu opfavois 
n Kai xnpais Kai tois dia vooov rj h aWrjv ai]iav \ziTTO[xevoig icai' tois iv 6t • 
CfjLOtq bci Kai toi$ iraptirtdrijxois boi %ivoi$ Kai* ai:\(OS tois iv xpua lai Kjjdtpwv 
yivtrai. Just. Mart. Apol. 2, p. 99, Edit, Colon . 1686. 



THE PEIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 51) 

Bishop personally visited, inspected every individual case 
from first to last, himself alone, and distributed relief to 
the poor sufferers with his own hand; for here the stress 
of all lies, Which must necessarily prove them to be so 
few; and to give a better colour to this interpretation, he 
finds out a noted parish term for this Episcopal almoner, 
and translates him an overseer. Now let the common 
sense of all mankind judge for us, if any public trust of 
this nature was ever understood to be necessarily execu- 
ted so in any sort of society whatsoever. I believe Jus- 
tin Martyr himself, or any other Christian writer besides 
him, would have ventured to say as much, or more, than 
all we have here, of St. Paul's care in treasuring up and 
distributing the alms of many Christian congregations, 
for the relief of all his Churches. And yet in the sense 
we here contend for, he had succoured but a poor num- 
ber of the whole, and been but a small sub almoner in the 
matter, if what he obtained of the several Churches to 
collect, what the Presbyters and Elders did by his order 
in it, and the messengers of their own too, which he al- 
lowed to distribute it for him, had not been imputed to 
his own person, as common governor and guardian for 
them all. And why should it then be so impracticable a 
thing, as is here pretended, for any single person to take 
care of distressed Christians in more than a single con- 
gregation? Besides, the charity of the -Church in those 
days, was, among other uses, to be employed for relief 
of banished and captive brethren, in mines, in islands, in 
remotest barbarous countries. In what sense did the 
Bishop personally do all this? But I am weary of serious 
reasoning, in so slight an objection as this is. 

* And yet what follows, I should less expect to meet 

* See Enquiry. &c. p, 22. 2.3. 24. 



60 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

with from so judicious a hand. For he observes, in no 
less than seventeen or eighteen instances here produced 
together, that when the ancient Church writers give an 
account of sundry public and solemn acts of discipline 
in a Diocese, as censures, excommunications, absolu- 
tions, elections, ordinations, or the like, they tell us, they 
were done before the whole Church, before the multitude? 
before all the people,, by the suffrage of all the brother- 
hood, with the knowledge, and in the presence of the peo- 
ple; and from hence concludes, that all the whole Dio- 
cese personally met together in one place upon these oc- 
casions, and consequently were no more than could make 
one single congregation. 

And here I cannot but observe these three things: 
1st. That this singular construction of such obvious 
and familiar forms of speech as these are, bears very 
hard upon the common sense and language of all man- 
kind. Can no public act of civil justice, or solemn min- 
istration in the Church amongst us, be said to pass in the 
face of the country, before all the people, openly and in 
the sight of all men, nay in the face of the tvhole icorld^ 
as some will think it no absurdity to say, unless the 
matter of fact will answer to the very letter of the phrase? 
Are not all public or solemn acts of Church or state, as 
to discipline and government, familiarly distinguished 
from any others, by such a latitude of expression as this, 
and no otherwise taken by any man, that ever I heard 
of, than that a general liberty is given to all, who either 
can, or will, or are concerned to be present at them, to 
come and offer what they think material; to judge, or bear 
witness of the regularity and justice of what is done? 
And if every individual member of each respective so- 
ciety were expected to be personally present at such> 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURtJXI, &'C. 61' 

solemnities as these; neither courts, nor halls, nor cathe- 
drals, were ever yet erected, that could answer the oc- 
casions which the Church or state would have for them; 
and yet no English author, I am persuaded, would think 
it an impropriety to say, that such public acts of law or 
discipline as these, were done in the presence, sight and 
cognizance of the whole country, Church, or people; and 
if no exceptions, but rather apparent acclamations were' 
made, as is not unusal upon sundry such occasions, they 
would say, they were done with the general" consent, 
suffrage, and approbation of them all. But, 

2d. That other way of arguing bears no less hard 
upon the very language of the holy Scriptures themselves; 
and therefore there is little reason to fasten it on the 
writings of the primitive fathers, who were the true guar- 
dians and assertors of them. 

What more familiar phrase in the whole history of the 
law delivered by Moses, and during all the time of his 
government, than that * Moses himself spake to all the 
congregation of Israel, whatsoever the Lord commanded 
him; nay, even in the ears of all the congregation of 
Israel, he is said to f speak the words of that song, which 
he left for a testimony amongst them. In what sense 
do we conceive he himself couM be said to speak in the 
hearing of so numerous a host, as the children of Israel 
then were? At different times, do we think? or tribe by 
tribe, and by piece-meals, in his own person? No, he 
himself gives us a better key for the understanding of 
such phrases as these: For at the 28th verse immediate- 
ly foregoing, gather unto me, says he, the elders of the 
tribes, and the officers, that I may speak these wordsiniheir 

* ExocL xxxv. 1,4.. Deut. v. 1. xxix. 2. &c. 
t, Deut. xxxi.. 30, 
6* 



62 AN 0RIGIKAU BKAUGHT OF 

ears, and call heaven and earth to record against them. 
So that it plainly appears, that whatsoever Moses spake 
in such a manner, and in such an audience, as was 
sufficient to convey his words and precepts to all the 
tribes of Israel, though not immediately from his own 
lips, that the holy Prophet himself thought not improper- 
ly expressed, when he said afterwards, that he spoke 
them to the whole congregation of Israel. * And if we 
can conceive any literal way of interpreting these, and 
many such like expressions in the Holy Bible, so that 
six hundred thousand men should at once be instructed 
by the ministry of one man, we need dispute no more 
about the greater or lesser numbers in the Diocese of a 
primitive Church, since one such extraordinary comment 
as that would answer all for us. But, 

3d. To argue more directly ad hominem in this case: 
If that way of reasoning be right, then it will prove the 
Dioceses of latter ages, as well as the ancientest of them 
all, to be but mere congregational Churches too. Com- 
pare the times and phrases, and you will find it to be so. 
Our Enquirer tells us from St. Cyprian, f that Sabinus 
was elected Bishop of Emerita by the suffrage of all the 
brotherhood. This was in the third age. 

Now Theodoret tells us, that Nectarius was made 
Bishop of Constantinople £ by the suffrage of the whole 
city too; and Flavianus made Bishop of Antioch, § the 
whole Church, as it were with one voice, giving their suf. 

* Of like phrases in the New Testament, 6ee Matt. iii. 5. Job . 
xii. 19. Acts xvii. 5. &c. 

f De universe fratornitatis suffragio. Cyp. Ep. 68, p. 6. 

$ nacr^ oru/^??0tf r^EK/cA^o-ms (iHTXipSia [ttag <pu)vr)s<- Theod. 1. 5, c. 
9, R . 211, Paris, 1673. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 63 

frage for him. And this was towards the latter end of 
the fourth age. The like says Platina of Gregory the 
great, that he was made Bishop of Rome by the * unani- 
mous consent of all: And again, f all the people chose 
him, says Gregory of Tours; and this at the very close of 
the sixth age. 

The learned Enquirer again £ tells us, from an Afri- 
can Synod in 258. that ordinations should be done with 
the knowledge, and in the presence of the people; that so 
they might be just and lawful, being approved by the suf- 
frage and judgment of all; and that accordingly St. Cy- 
prian consulted his people so: And from hence he infers, 
that his Diocese could be no more than one congregation. 
Now the Roman Presbyters, in their letter to Honorius 
the Emperor, which was in the fifth century, speak just 
the same thing in relation to Boniface their Bishop, whom 
they chose and consecrated in that very manner. § On 
a set day, (say they) calling all to an Assembly, we went 
to a Church we had all agreed upon, and there consulting 
with the Christian people, we chose him whom God had 
ordered; for by the applause of all the people, and the 
consent of the best in the city, we pitched upon the venera- 
ble Boniface, a man ordained and consecrated by Divine 
institution. Here is an election and ordination in one 

* Uno omnium consensu creatur pontifex, Platina in Vit. Greg,. 

i Gregorium plebs omnis elegit. Greg. Turon. Hisl. Franc. 1. 
10. c. 1. 

J See the Enquiry, p. 24. 

$ Altero die ad Ecclesium ubi prius ab omnibus turn erat constitutum, 
habita omnium collatione. properavimus, ibiq; participato cum Chris- 
tiana plebe consilio, quern Deus jussit elegimus; nam venerabilem vi- 
rum Bonifacium — acclamatione totius populi ac consensu meliorum* 
civitatis asseruimus, divinse institutionis ordine consecratum. Baron . 
An. 419. N. 8. Mag. 1601. p, 443. 



64 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

certain place, in a general assembly of the Church, con- 
sultation with, and applause of all the people in it; and 
yet, our learned Enquirer is very well assured, I doubt 
not, that there were many congregations in the Church 
of Rome at that time; and therefore, what proof such 
arguments can be, that there were no more than one in 
St. Cyprian's time, I shall leave to himself to judge. 

But can a Bishop write a public gratulatory letter in 
his own name, and in the name of all his fraternity, as 
our * Enquirer observes St. Cyprian did to Lucius, Bish- 
op of Rome, and not have all the fraternity, i. e. all the 
people of his Diocese present with him? Yes, surely, in 
the sense St. Cyprian meant, he may; for if all the peo- 
ple of his own Diocese were met together at the sending 
that letter, then all the people of many other Dioceses, and 
probably of his whole Province, were assembled togeth- 
er for it too: For his words are, f / and my colleagues j 
and all the fraternity, send this letter to you. Now col 
leagues, in St. Cyprian's language, I think is unquestion- 
ably understood of fellow-Bishops, and given by him to 
bo other order of Ecclesiastics whatsoever; so that all 
the fraternity, subjoined to them, does most properly 
mean, that they and their Churches, as the occasion did 
require, sent unanimous congratulations to the blessed 
confessor Lucius, so lately returned from banishment. 

If this be thought no clear construction of the place, 
let us compare it with the Synodical Epistle of the Coun- 
cil of Antioch, from whence our Enquirer himself here 
quotes another authority to the like purpose. The Bish- 

* Enquiry, p. 25. Fraternitas oranis. Cypr, Ep. 58. $ 2. or Ep. 
61. Edit. Oxon. 

t Ego el college, et fraternitas omnis, has ad vo« literas mittimui 
Cypr. ibc 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 65 

ops in that Council writing to Dionysius, Bishop of Rome, 
and Maximus, Bishop of Alexandria, first prefixed their* 
own names to the Epistle, and then join with them, 
the Churches of God also; that is, unquestionably, the 
Churches they presided over, who jointly with them sent 
greeting, and concurred in the account they there give 
of Paulus Samosatenus' case; and do we think the whole 
Dioceses of those several Bishops were personally pre- 
sent with them in that Council? That would make it such 
a Synod as is surely without example, and I think beyond 
imagination. Certainly Bishops, or the chief magistrates 
of any society or corporation, may in consistory or 
council, write letters of a public importance in the name 
of the society or body they relate to, without convening 
or polling all the individual members of it: And their 
reading of letters of such public concern to their nume- 
rous people, which is another argument our learned f 
Enquirer insists upon, is better accounted for in such an 
obvious sense as this is, than he will ever account for 
King J JosiaJSs reading the Book cf the Covenant in the 
ears of all the men of Judah, and all the inhabitants of 
Jerusalem, in his own literal and strained sense of such 
expressions. So that the triumph, in the close of this 
head, might as well have been in softer words, at least; 
for it is pretty much to say, for no better reasons than 
these, that a primitive Diocese could not possibly be more 
than one single congregation. 

* EAcvo? Kat Yiizvaios kcli Qsocpi^og Kai ot \oittoi iravrsg ot crov 77/ztv 

rapoiKav'Jig rag eyyvg noXitg Kai edvrj 'Rtcigkokoi kcli' UpigSv^ipot Kat AiaKovoi 
Kai ai T&KKk-qaiai Qm ayarrrjlotg, Szc , x aL P £tv ' 

t Enq. p. 24. Sanctiisimoe atque amplissimse plebi legere. Cypr. 
Ep. 55. or in Oxf. Edit. 59. 

J 2 Kings xxiii. 2. 



66 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

There are some few quotations amongst the rest in 
this place, which urge the necessity of all the people's 
presence indeed, upon account of the part and right they 
all had to judge of any offence that was brought before 
the consistory of the church; but those will be more 
properly considered in the following chapters, where 
they are repeated to us again, and offered as undeniable 
proofs of such a right and practice in the primitive 
Church. In the mean time, I cannot but say, it is sur- 
prising to see, how often the same quotations are brought 
over and over again in this short Enquiry, to serve the 
different ends of it, and make it appear a work of great 
variety of reading, and strongly supported by primitive 
authority for it. 

We have a pregnant instance of this, in the four next 
pages before us, which are from page 27. to page 31. 
Our author had gleaned, as we have seen already, all 
the short phrases in St. Ignatius's Epistles, that he 
thought gave any countenance to his hypothesis, and 
offered them at once to prove his general proposition: 
(These we had at page 17. to page 21.) And now he 
gives us them all again by retail, and applies the self- 
same quotations by piece-meals, to prove, that each of 
those Churches St. Ignatius wrote to, were mere Congre- 
gational Churches, and no more. This makes the bulk 
of authority look great indeed, but adds not one grain of 
weight to it; and therefore the reader will excuse me, I 
know, if I take no more notice of his repeated arguments 
here about one Altar, one Eucharist, one Prayer for the 
whole Church; that the Bishop took one common care of 
them all; thai nothing ?nust be done without the Bishop; 
that all must assemble together in one place, and the like. 
By which repetitions he here labors separately to prove, 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 67 

that the Dioceses of Smyrna, Ephesus, Magnesia, Phila- 
delphia, and Trallium, were such sort of Churches as he 
contends for. 

The strength of all those arguments, I conceive, I have 
fairly tried already; and it is much there should scarcely 
be one new one found to make any of those five eminent 
Churches bear a clear testimony for him, when he took 
the pains to consider each of them singly, and one by one. 
It is true, to make the Diocese of Smyrna appear such, 
he adds a short clause or two; (omitted before) 1st,* 
That the Bishop of that Church could know his whole 
Jlock personally ly their names. So he translates the 
place, though St. Ignatius' words have no such affirma- 
tion in them, but are only a plain advice to St. Polycarp 
to do what the primitive Bishops always did, that is, to 
keep the names of every member of his Church enrolled 
in what the ancients called the Matricula of their Church; 
the occasion of the words imply it to be so: He just be- 
fore besought St. Polycarp f not to neglect the widows of 
the Church; and immediately after, desires him % not to 
overlook so much as the men-servant: and maid-servants in 
it; and in the midst of this, as a means so to know the qual- 
ity, number, and condition of his Diocese, advises him to 
enquire out all by name, that is, to get such a register of 
their names, that upon occasion of any object of charity 
proposed to him, of any complaint or application made to 
him about any within his cure or jurisdiction, or in case 
of apostacy, or perseverance in time of persecution, or 
the like; by means of this general Matricula, he, as the 
other Bishops did, might more directly know how the 

* Enq. p. 27, E| ovofiajos Travlas tym. Ep. ad Polycarp. p. 13, 

t yiripai (i7) api\iido)cav. Ep. ad Po]}C p. 12. 

J E| ovofiajos iravlas £?«(, AwAyj Kai Sn\as py vmpi(pavtt. lb. p. 13. 



68 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

case stood with them. And which was more than all 
this, the names thus entered in this sacred record were 
personally entitled then to all the public intercessions and 
spiritual blessings obtained by the eucharistical prayers, 
oblations, and sacraments of the whole Church; and to 
have their names blotted out of this, was a constant effect 
of ex-communication, and was dreaded by all that had 
true veneration, as those primitive Christians had, for 
the holy ordinances of the Church. Those who know 
the right nature of the orthodox commemorations, and 
eucharistical offerings for the saints, before the Roman 
corruptions so wretchedly infected them, as they now do, 
cannot be unacquainted with this. And these were suf- 
ficient reasons for that apostolical father to mind a Bish- 
op of the Church to be careful of keeping such a neces- 
sary Matricula as this, and an effectual way for St. Po- 
lycarp to take care of the meanest and poorest members 
of his Diocese; which, the context tells us, was the occa* 
sion of St. Ignatius' using these words. But as to the 
matter of but one single congregation being then under 
his cure, and that he must personally know them all ly 
name, as one neighbor knows another, which our En- 
quirer's translation affirms of them, I think they no more 
imply it, than that Augustus Caesar had but one town to 
command, and could know every subject he had, when, 
for many political occasions, he caused them all to be 
enrolled, and required the state of his empire to be 
brought in to him: * For the censor's work, in such a 
case as that, was to give in an estimate of the age, chil- 
dren, family, and estates of all the people under him, as 
Tully gives us an account of it. 

* Ccnsores populi sevitates, sobole?, familias, pe~unia?q; censent© 
Cic. dcleg.U3. foL.1. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 69 

But still, says our Enquirer, Smyrna could not d have 
more than one congregation in it, because, as St. Ignatius 
says again, * it was not fitting that any should marry there 
without the Bishojfs consent. Now, I confess, it saems to 
me no impracticable matter for the same thing to be 
done in the very city of London, or York, at this day, if 
either banns or licenses were managed with that proper 
care which the church designed they should; nay, I think 
it may be said, even as matters stand now, that either 
the Bishop in person, or such as are commissioned by 
him, which is much the same thing, have a necessary 
cognizance of all such solemn contracts, before the con- 
summation of them, in the largest Dioceses amongst us. 
And this gives opportunity, at least, to consent, or disal- 
low of them, without reducing their Dioceses to fewer 
congregations than they have all along had. 

Once more the holy martyr is summoned to bear wit- 
ness to this congregational cause; and if he fails them 
there, our learned Enquirer, for a very great while at 
least, gives him quite over. This last, is a pretty close 
evidence indeed, as f he manages it, for he makes the 
holy martyr expressly say, that the Diocese of Magnesia 
had but barely one Church in it; and I will shew you 
how he says it: In his zeal for the unity of all the Chris, 
tians there, he bids i them all run one way together, as to 
the temple of God, or as to the one ie?wple of God, as the 
old Latin translation has it, and the learned editor from 
the Florentine MSS. says it should be, and as to the one 
altar; plainly exhorting them, by way of similitude, to 

*n/)S7T£( SiTois yafjisai nat yafiHfiivaig \ii]a yvuyjxrjg rs Ktciskoith t*><i)aiv.irot+ 
isBai'. Ep. ad Polyc. p. 13. 

f Enq. p. 29. Ei?7 vaov Gey. Ignat Ep. ad Mag. p. 24. 
t Uavjts os tig vaov ovvlpixzlt Oes* dvciao-njptov^ &C. Ignat. ib. 

.7 



70 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

Christian unity and communion, after the pattern of the 
ancient Church of God amongst the Jews; who, though 
they had never so many synagogues, yet they all cen- 
tered, and were united in that one temple, and one altar, 
which God had fixed for them at Jerusalem. But that 
this comparative way of the holy martyr's arguing might 
the less be perceived, our careful Enquirer takes no no- 
tice of the little particle, & s or as, but quotes the temple 
of God in the singular number by itself, as clear to his 
purpose, and gives it the name of a Christian Church, 
though, besides this unfair dealing in the case, it may 
justly be a question, whether St. Ignatius himself, or any 
cotemporary writer, ever used that word Na ^ for a place 
of Christian worship at all, it being generally a term in 
primitive writers, applied to Jewish or Heathen temples; 
and then judge what a proof this must be, for but one 
congregation in the whole Diocese of Magnesia. 

And now, though all the Churches St. Ignatius wrote 
to, were eminent cities of the Lydian, or proconsular 
Asia; most of them the seats of public justice for the pro- 
vince where the Roman governor kept his residence, and 
which is infinitely more, were dignified with a singular 
visitation by our blessed Lord in his great revelation to 
St. John; and therefore scarcely to be imagined such 
inconsiderable Churches, as our learned Enquirer labors 
to represent them to us. Yet, for fuller satisfaction in 
the case, he frankly appeals to Antioch, Rome, Carthage, 
and Alexandria, the undoubted metropolitan cities of the 
empire, to bear witness to the certainty of his congrega- 
tional scheme; and therefore, not to neglect him, we must 
briefly survey them all. 

Antioch was early blessed with the glad tidings of the 
gospel; the blood of the first martyr became the seeds of 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 71 

a Christian Church there, as the fathers took a pleasure 
to speak; for many Christians, dispersed upon that occa- 
sion, resorted thither; and the first account we have of 
their labors is, * that the hand of the Lord was with them, 
and a great number believed and turned unto the Lord. 
Tidings of this came to the Church of Jerusalem, where 
the whole college of Apostles were in readiness to consult 
for them. They send Barnabas, a good man, and full of 
the Holy Ghost and of Faith, to improve this happy op- 
portunity, and the success answered their expectation; 
for by his powerful exhortations, much people, says the 
holy text, was added to the Lord. But to forward this 
work of the Lord still more, Barnabas travels to Tarsus,, 
and joins Saul, the great Apostle of the Gentiles now, 
and returning with him to Antioch, they continue a whole 
year together in that populous city, teaching much people. 
What a harvest of Christian converts those Apostolical 
laborers made in that compass of time, assisted by all that 
fled thither from Jerusalem besides, by the f men of Cy- 
prus and Cyrene, fellow-laborers with them, to convert 
the Greeks as well as Jews to the faith; and by the sev- 
eral inspired prophets, so peculiarly ^ noted to be amongst 
them, I refer to the sober judgment of all who know the 
fruits of many single sermons preached by an Apostle, at 
the first promulgation of the Gospel. Two things are 
sure, 1st, That the reputation and honor of the converts 
there was such, that they laid aside the derided name of 
Nazarenes or Galilseans now, and openly assumed the 
name of their Lord and Master, § and were first called; 
Christians there. 

* Acts xi. 19. Ver. % L, to ver. 27. 
1 Acts xi. 20. 

^Acts xi. 27, and chap. xiii. 1. 
$ Acts xi. 26. 



72 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

Secondly, * That there were two distinct sects or par- 
ties of them; Judaizing Christians, zealous of the Law; 
and Gentile converts, as earnestly insisting on their free- 
dom and exemption from it: Each party so considerable, 
as to call for an Apostolical Council to decide the con- 
troversy between them. 

Such was the very infant state of this Church of Anti- 
och; the oversight whereof, antiquity tells us, the great 
Apostle St. Peter, in a peculiar manner took upon him- 
self, and for six or seven years, at least, made it his first 
and special Apostolic See, After him, Church history 
acquaints us with fourteen Bishops successively there, 
before the heretic Paulus of Samosata was promoted to 
that See. In the number of these, were those mirrors of 
learning, zeal, fortitude, and piety, Ignatius, Theophilus, 
and Babylas, scarce to be equalled in all the monuments 
of the Church after the Apostles' time; whereof the first 
sat forty years, and each of the other two thirteen years 
together were the watchful and laborious Bishops of that 
exceeding vast and numerous flock, as the words of the 
learned § Doctor Cave are, where he speaks of St. Igna- 
tius' charge at Antioch. 

Yet notwithstanding all the united labors of so many 
Apostles, Prophets, holy Martyrs, and Confessors, to 
plant and improve a Christian Church in this renowned 
city of the East, in this [egoTroAts,] or city ofGod y as the an- 
cients thought fit to name it; we are borne down, that 
there never were more believers in it for two hundred and 
seventy years after Christ, than what could meet togeth- 
er in one single house of prayer, and barely make a sin* 
gle congregation. 

* Chap. xv. 1. 2. 

\ Cave in the Life of Ignat. p. 108. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 



73 



One would reasonably look for very unanswerable ev* 
idence, to prove so extraordinary an assertion; * espe- 
cially, since this city of Antioch, according to St. Chry- 
sostome's calculation of it, for St. Ignatius' times con- 
tained no less than two hundred thousand souls in it; and 
f Tertullian, as we have seen before, durst tell the per- 
secuting Scapula, that the Christians then were well nigh 
the greater part of every city. Yet all that is offered us 
to the contrary, is only this, that Paulus of Samosata, 
the heretical Bishop of Antioch, after the middle of the 
third century, refused to resign the Church's house, when 
he was synodically deposed by a council held there; and 
this Church' 1 s house, as our learned ^ author will have it, 
must needs be the only house of prayer or public worship 
for all that Diocese, and consequently they could make 
but one congregation. 

Now, that the Bishop of Antioch had a peculiar Church, 
or house of prayer for himself, as Bishop, more imme- 
diately to worship or officiate in, need not be disputed; 
and this so peculiarly the Church's house, that so long 
as he was rightly possessed of that, he was possessed of 
the Church or Diocese whereof he was Bishop; and to be 
legally and canonically ejected out of that, was to be 
ejected out of the Church, be the Diocese great or small, 
of more or fewer congregations belonging to it: For 
so, when Constantius the Emperor was resolved to eject 
§ Paulus of Constantinople out of that Bishopric, he 

* See Dr. Cave, ubi supra, p. 101. 

t Tanta hominum multitude, pars paene major cujusq ; civitatis. Ad 
Scap. c. 2. p. 86. 

£ M?7<50/*ws iKst]vai rrjg EKtcXrjatas oiks Euseb. 1. 7, C. £0. 
$ Tov fi rv HavXov rr\<; EfCKXrjaias SKoaWrj avtiaayi] di «5 avjrjv Mcucetiov-. 
i»,. Soerat. E.H.I. 2. e. 6. 

7* 



74 AN ORIGINAL DKAUGHT OP 

ordered Philip the Prefect to turn him only out of one 
Church, in the singular number, and place Macedonius 
in: that is, out of that single Church where the Bishops 
of Constantinople used to reside and officiate, though 
there were sundry other Churches^ long before that, 
built by * Constantino in that city, and an undoubted 
part of that Bishop's Diocese. But this single Church, 
or house of prayer, was so peculiarly the Church's house, 
that, by being dispossessed of that, he was entirely thrown 
out of the whole Church, or Diocese, of Constantinople. 
And instances enough of this kind might be given, if need 
required; but I think the case is known to be the very 
same in respect of any modern Bishop's Cathedral at 
this day. Yet, to come more directly to the case before 
us, I think the Synod of Antioch's account of Paulus Sa- 
mosatenus, from whence this very objection is taken, does 
pretty fairly prove to us, that that Heretical Bishop had 
more Churches under him, besides that house of the church 
which he kept possession of; which it is questioned, in- 
deed, whether it was a house of worship or no, because, 
amongst the many accusations of him, they tell us, * he 
sent Presbyters out to preach up his own praise- in their 
sermons to the people; and who should these be, but Pres- 
byters, that officiated under him within his own jurisdic- 
tion; for the phrase imports no intreaty, as if it were to 
aliens not subject to him. but an act of authority rather, 
for he sent them out to do so. Nay, should they have been 
Presbyters related to another See, they are, at least, an 
instance of religious assemblies held by such, in contra- 
distinction to the Bishops to whom they did belong, which 

* Euseb. de vit. Const. 1. 3. c. 4S. 

f Up'iV&vTipss iv rais xpos to Xaov o[j.i\igai KaStrjai SiakiyuxQai. Euseb 

I. 7, c. 30, p. 223. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 75 

overthrows the Enquirer's congregational scheme, take 
it in what sense you please. I will not conceal what 
is farther said here, that he sent out Bishops of adja- 
cent villages and cities to do the same thing for him; 
which our learned Enquirer makes farther use of in 
another place, and shall be considered there. I shall only- 
say here, that the judicious Valesius understands those 
Bishops to be no others than flattering Chorepiscopi, 
which makes them a farther part of his own Diocese still. 
But this alters not the present case; and so the Bishopric 
of Antioch, I hope, will lose but little.of its glory and ex- 
tent by one such unconcluding argument as this. 

Rome, the Metropolis of the Empire, is appealed to 
next, and allowed no greater honour than the rest: Their 
faith was early spoken of throughout the whole world; 
their Church founded by the two great Apostles both of 
Jews and Gentiles, and Martyrs and confessors were 
zealous pastors over them for many generations after; 
Yet, for above 200 years after Christ, our learned En- 
quirer will assure us, they were not improved to more 
than a single congregation. His demonstration is this, 
that * Natalis, a penitent confessor in that Church, re- 
turning from the heresy of Theodotus, fell down at the 
feet of the Bishop, clergy, and 'people, to bewail his fault 
before them; and at length the Church was touched with 
compassion towards him, I shall take no advantage of 
his transposing the historian's words here, so as to make 
neither sense nor grammar in his quotation of them, but 
only set them right in the margin, and allow the full im- 
portance of them. The penitent f Natalis, it appears, 

* Enquiry p. 32. lipoa-uzauv rw E7no7co7ru> ic\r)pu) \auco)v ttjv gv CTr\ay^ 
%vov CKicXrjGiav tct foycsi xpv^^l^vov. Euseb. 1. 5, c. 28. 

fMf7a 7toXXt7J onvSris Kai Saxpvwv vpos-iouv Zxpvfrivo rw gmcKoirw Kv\io[igvov 



76 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

went early to the place where the Bishop, paid his de- 
votions, falls down before the Bishop, clergy and 
people there; and with prayers and tears, besought the 
merciful Church of Christ to admit him to communion 
again; which, with great difficulty, was granted to him. 
Now, this could not be done, it seems, in this particular 
manner; but that the whole Diocese, under the Bishop 
Zephyrinus's jurisdiction and care, must needs be then 
with him, and consequently make but one congregation; 
and if we would argue so, we might affirm as well, that 
Christ had no part of a Church in the world but what 
was there; for it was the merciful Church of the merciful 
Christ that he begged to be admitted into, and which he 
moved with his tears; and if that particular assembly was 
no otherwise so, than as it was in unity with the one only 
Church of Christ upon earth, then it would be as much 
so, if there were twenty other congregations belonging 
to it, in the same union and communion with it, as if it 
were the only one that the whole Diocese had. But, to 
be plainer in the case, and bring it home to our own times, 
should such a case, as Natalis' was, happen in any Chris- 
tian Church at this day, and the Bishop be found at his 
devotions with any of his clergy about him, as in his own 
Cathedral it is scarcely to be known when he can be 
found without them, and in the primitive Church, where 
the orders of them they called the clergy were many 
more than now, to be sure they never were, and should 
the penitent supplicant kneel before them all, and, in a 
full congregation of the people, ask the pardon of the 
Church; might not an English historian, do we think, 

vttu) tu$ noSas 8 fjLOVovTW tv TO) icXripu) a\\a icai to)v \aiK(av cvyxiou te rois Sat: 
pvcri to tv crrcXayxvov EK/cA^crtav r« i\ir)[xovos Xpfjy ttoWtj ti ttj derjcrii %p?7<7a- 
fiivov fioXts KoiviavrjOivai. Euseb. 1. 5, c. 28, p. 160. Edit. Paris, 1678. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 77 

say, that this humble penitent fell down at the feet 
of the Bishop, clergy, and people, and yet the Bishop 
have considerably more of both kinds within his Diocese 
and jurisdiction, than were personally present at this 
particular solemnity? Surely one would think he might: 
And yet not a tittle more than this is said in the penitent 
Natalis's case; for there is not so much as the useful 
phrase, of all the clergy, or all the people, offered us to. 
help us out here, which in many of our Enquirer's fore- 
going quotations he laid so great a stress upon, though 
the construction was far from being just and reasonable 
there. 

To strengthen this instance of Natalis's case, there 
are five reasons more offered us, but every one of them 
repetitions of what had been said before. For * here 
we are twice told again, that all the brethren met together 
in the Church to choose a Bishop when the see was vacant; 
which I have expressly shewn to be affirmed of elections 
in the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries, when all the 
world knows the Dioceses had congregations enough ia 
each of them. Two other reasons are, that all met to 
concur in sending salutations and letters to other Churches , 
and to hear such read. And lastly, that the Church of 
Rome had so peculiarly but one altar, that the second^ 
which Novatian erected, loas called a profane altar. For 
each of which reasons, I only refer the reader to what 
has been said of them before, who, I believe, will be sor- 
ry with me to see such arguments relied upon in so im- 
portant a cause; and so often repeated, to appear many. 

In the mean time, the Church of Rome is far better 
represented to us by Cornelius, the truly apostolical Bish* 

* Enquiry, page 32, 33. 



78 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

op of it, in the third century; who tells us, there were 
then no less than forty-six Presbyters in it; which, if 
compared with the number of assemblies in each city, the 
erecting new and larger Christian Churches in them alh 
mentioned by Eusebius within the same oentury, (Eccl. 
Hist. I. 8. c. 1.) fairly implying that they had old and 
smaller ones even before them; we need not be at a loss 
to conceive what sort of services those numerous Pres- 
byters were engaged in: For it was to minister, no 
doubt of it, in many of those particular oratories they 
were then possessed of; as you will the easier agree to, 
if you consider what Cornelius farther says of it, that 
besides those * forty-six Presbyters, they had seven dea- 
cons, seven sub-deacons, forty 4wo acolyths; exorcists, read- 
ers, and door-keepers fifty-two; all necessary, says he, 
to the service of the church, besides widows, impotent, and 
poor above fifteen hundred, living on the alms of the 
Church; and answerable to all this, a vast innumerable 
multitude of people in it, as the holy Bishop's words ex- 
pressly are. 

This is so authentic an account of that primitive' 
Church of Rome, as I believe the most zealous advocates 
for the congregational way will not pretend to call in 
•question; but how they can reconcile it to their own 
scheme, I leave to themselves, 

I enlarge not here, on the transcendent liberality of 
tlris single Church, by which f they supported many other 

* HptS&vTtpvs TtaoapaKovIa i% Skxkovus irfja vno hiaKovxs nT\a aKo\vdu$ bvo 
Kai TWffapaKQvIa i^opKtgras Se Kai avayvuslas apa irv\iopois Svo Kai TttvlrjKov']a' 
XVpas cvv 6\i6optvois vtrep ras x^ a S mvlaKoatas «£ nav^Jos r\ ts 6csttot« 
X^piS ««t <j>i\av6poma Sialptfyti tosvto TrXrjdog Kai avayicaiov tv ttj EKKXyoia 
irXyOvw aptdpos pcra piyifja Kai avapiBprflv Xay. Euseb. His. Eccl. f, 6, 
c, 43. 

t EKKA?7<riai£ iro\\ai$ rats Kara rcaaav tto\iv c<j>o&ia ntpmiv tv pt^aWoig Si 
aS&Qots virapxwtv rinxopvyw7 a S» Euseb. Ecll. His. 1, 4, c. 23. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &,C. 79 

Churches in every city, as Dionysius of Corinth bears wit- 
ness for them, relieving their poor, and maintaining their 
Christian slaves that were condemned to the mines. Nay, 
the other Dionysius of Alexandria affirms, that the * 
whole country of Arabia and all the provinces of Syria 
were abundantly relieved by the Church of Rome alone. 
Compute then the numerous clergy, the list of widows, of 
the afflicted and poor, which we have just now seen this 
single Church continually maintained at home; and if 
not many rich, not many noble were called, one would be 
even forced to think, that legions, at least, of a middle 
fortune must be in it, to raise such extraordinary contri- 
butions as these. 

Nor will I insist on the positive account the judicious f 
Mr. Mede gives us of particular Churches, or titles, as 
they were then called, that were founded in this Church 
of Rome in the second century, though he quotes the 
very names and qualities of them that founded them. 
Enough has been said, I hope, to vindicate this imperial 
city from the hard imputation of yielding no better fruits 
of the great apostles, saints and Martyr's blood, that was 
shed in it, than what amounted to a single congregational 
Church for three hundred years together. 

Carthage shares with Rome in this; and as she was 
rival once in glory, she must be as little in her Christian 
converts now. The great % Tertullian magnified in- 
deed that native city of his, and well nigh defied the 
persecuting governors with glorying in the numerous 
multitudes of believers there; but all, it seems, were a 
mere parochial congregation. This is somewhat strange, 

* At fiev toi Yvpiai o\ai nai rj ApaSia ois tirapKei^e iKa^o'Jz. lb. 1. 2, C. 5. 

f See Merie's works, Book 2. p . 327. Edit. 4. in 1677. 

X Tertull. ad Scapul. c. 2. p. 86. Edit. Rigalt. 2. Lutet. 1641, 



80 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

especially to those who know the glorious figure the 
Church of Carthage made, and the mighty influence it 
had in all affairs of the Christian world, in the Cyprian- 
ic age. Yet let us hear the evidence that is given for 
it; for that is but just and reasonable. 

The first reason offered is this, because * the Bishop 
of that Diocese could know every one therein. Now, I 
will but state the case of this quotation, and you will 
quickly see the determination in it. St. Cyprian was 
now in banishment, he writes to two African Bishops, 
Caldonius and Herculanus, and with them to Rogatian 
and Numidicus, two of his own Presbyters f that they 
should take care to relieve the necessities of the poor, 
out of the contribution of the brethren; and if any of them 
would work at their own trades, and yet could not fully 
provide for their families, they should allow them some- 
thing towards it; and in doing this, he directs them to in- 
form themselves carefully of the different ages, condition, 
and merits of the men, to the end that I myself, says he, 
upon whom this care lies, may forthwith thoroughly know 
them all, and if any of them be humble, meek, and worthy 
of it, I may put them into some office of the Church. I ap- 
peal to the words, context, and learned Annotations upon 
the place, if this be not the genuine sense of it;' wherein 
therefore, these two things are plain: 

* Enquiry, p. 34. Ut omnes optime nossem. Cypr. Ep. 38. $ 1. 
or in Oxon. Edit . Ep. 41 . 

f Cumque ego vos pro me vicario&miserim, ut expungeretis neces- 
sitates *fratrum nostrorum sumpiibus, fi qui etiam vellent suas arloa 
exercere, additamento, quantum satis esset, desideria eorum juvaretis; 
simul etiam et astates eorum, et conditiones, et merita discerneretis; 
ut jam nunc Ego, cui cura incumbit, omnes optime nossem, et dignos 
quoque et humiles et mites ad Ecclesiastics ad ministrationis officia 
parmoverera. Cyp. Ep . 41. ut £upra. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 



81 



1st. That the all here spoken of, were only the list, or 
Matricula, of the necessitous and poor ones in the Diocese. 
And, 

2d. That St. Cyprian had so little personal knowl- 
edge of them and their condition, that he employed the 
Bishops and Presbyters he wrote to, to send him the best 
information they could get of that matter; and this is 
brought as a proof, that the Bishop of that Diocese could 
know every one in it; which, I think, is as clear a proof of 
the contrary, as one could expect to meet with. 

And yet, the second argument upon this head, is drawn 
from this very passage again; for from this direction to 
the Bishops and Presbyters, to relieve all that wanted 
out of the contributions of the brethren, by making a wrong 
stop in the construction of it, he possesses his reader, * 
that the debts and necessities of all the brethren were defray- 
ed at the single expense of the Bishop; and then breaks 
out into admiration at the many thousand pounds he must 
needs have expended, if his Diocese had some scores of 
parishes in it! which is a mere chimera of his own form- 
ing; for St. Cyprian's words import no more, than that he 
was common almoner or curator for the poor of his Dio- 
cese, and therefore gave order to his agents in trust for 
him, to take what care they could in it; which how far it 
is from proving any Diocese to be a mere congregational 
Church, I have shewn at large already. 

A third argument is the very same which he gave us 
before, (page, 19.) viz: f that the Bishop celebrated the 
sacrament, the whole brotherhood being present; and I have 

* Rigaitius's note, approved by Bishop Fell, upon the place, is 
this, cujus necessitas beneficenlia frairum sublevebatur, ejus et noraen 
-expungebatur. 

t Enquiry, p. 35. 



82 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

shewn here above (at page, 62.) the unfair representation 
of that passage, and that the inference was not true. 

4th. But it is farther urged, * that all the people could 
hear and see the reader Celerinus, when he read from the 
pulpit; and I doubt not, but when, and where he read, it 
was so. But these general expressions, throughout this 
whole cause, without regard to the common acceptation of 
all mankind, admit of no limitations: but if all the people 
heard him, it must not be understood of all that were pres- 
ent, but of all the Diocese to a man; though St. Cyprian, 
■j* not above six lines lower, speaking of him again, says 
only, whosoever hears him, should imitate his faith . And 
Balsamon, I find, describing the office of a reader in gen- 
eral, at a time, when every Church that had any reader 
at all, had many congregations in it, expresses himself in 
much the same terms, and, as the translator renders it, 
makes him read so, ^ that every one heard him, as Suicer 
observes from him. Besides, that there were several 
readers in this Church of Carthage, is very sure. This 
Celerinus, with Aurelius, were two new ones just ordain- 
ed by St. Cyprian in his exile, and added to them that 
served the Church in his absence: And he tells them, 
|| he is sure they would wish to have many more such. 

The number of his Presbyters is as visible in all his 
writings too; and though men may form imaginary offices 
and employments for so many chargeable ministers in 

* Enquiry, ib. Plebi universal. Cypr, Ep. 34. or in Edit. Oxon 
39. 

f Lectoris ficlem quisquis audierlt imitetur. Ib. 

J Etti kowtj aKpoaczi avayvKvOKeiv Omnibus audibus. See Suicer 
a 1 vocem Avayvw^c. 

j| Scio vos optare tales in Ecdesia nostra quamplurimos ordinari. 
Ep. 38. p. 75. Edit. Oxon. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 83 

one congregation, when Christians had reason enough to 
be as frugal as they possibly could; yet a more natural 
and reasonable account of them, I believe, will never be 
given, than that they had several oratories to attend, 
especially in that state of dispersion they were then in r 
when it is scarcely conceivable they should hold so for- 
midable an assembly together, even if they could; and it 
is not a little remarkable, how often St. Cyprian com- 
plains of such and such Presbyters admitting the lapsed to 
communion, whilst others were commended for not doing 
so; which, if they all united in one assembly together, I 
think is not to be conceived. 

It is plain, the barbarous Proconsul Paternus, who 
condemned St. Cyprian himself, understood they had 
more places for religious assemblies than one, when he 
told him, the emperors Valerian and Gallienus * com- 
manded there should be no meetings in any places, and 
that they should not enter into their Cemeteries, (in the 
plural number) as the words in the margin shew. 

If I could attend repetitions, with more patience than I 
have already done, here was a great deal more work for 
me still; for here we have the current arguments again, 
of all the people being present, consulted, and approving 
ordinations, elections, Church censures, absolutions, and 
the like. Now* so far as this manner of their being pres- 
ent at these acts of discipline, prove the Diocese to be a 
bare single congregation, I have fully considered them 
before, and therefore may justly supersede them here. 
And so far as they refer to a pretended right or jurisdic- 
tion of the people in the government of the Church, we 
shall find them pressed upon us again and again still, and 

* Praecipiuntne in aliquibuslocis conciliabulafiant, nee Ccemeieria 
innrre Jiantur. Cypr. Pass, ex Vet. Cod. MSS. in Pontii Vit. Cypr. 



84 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

under that consideration I shall examine them farther as 
they lie in my way. In the mean time, I shall leave the 
Church of Carthage, with this authentic testimony for her, 
that as little as she was in her flourishing times of peace 
and safety, the number of her lapsed members only, was 
such in the Decian persecution, * that thousands of tick- 
ets were daily granted by the Martyrs and confessors on 
their behalf, to procure their reconciliation to the Church; 
and many of those tickets, not for single persons, but for 
themselves and friends together; \ for so their holy Bish- 
op expressly tells the Roman Presbyters and deacons, 
and reproved the overforward Martyrs and confessors 
themselves for it; and what manner of single congrega- 
tion such a Church should make, before the fatal fall of 
so vast a number of her members, and after their blessed 
union again, I leave to any impartial man to judge. 

The last Diocese, considered by our learned Enquirer, 
is that of Alexandria; and had he happily begun, instead 
of ending, with this, one would be apt to think it might 
have prevented the trouble of all the res!; for if ever any 
author gave up his whole cause at once, I think it may 
be seen here. His main point all along contended for, 
was this, that every primitive Diocese for three hundred 
years together, consisted only of a single congregation; 
but now the force of truth constrains him to confess, £ 
that the Christians of Alexandria, within the third century, 

* Sine ullo discrimine atq; examine siogulorum darentur quotidie 
libellorum millia. Cypr. Ep. 20. Edit, Oxon. 

■f Quibusdam sic libellos fieri, ut dicatur, communicet cum suns- 
et possunt nobis viceni, et triceni etaraplius offer ri, qui propinqui et 
affines, et liberti ac domestici esse asseverentur ejus qui accipit libellum* 
Cypr. Ep. 15. Edit. Oxon, p. 3.5. 

£ Enquiry, p. 38> 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 85 

divided themselves into several distinct and separate con- 
gregations, and all subjected to one Bishop. These are 
his own words, and what need have we then, you will 
say, of any farther controversy? I confess, I should 
think no need at all, only it is not amiss we should see 
what management is used with this dangerous evidence, 
which extorted this candid confession from him, that he 
might not hurt the congregational cause after all. 

It was a passage in Dionysius, the holy Bishop of Alex- 
andria himself, that inclined our zealous Enquirer to this 
gentle temper; for this, * says he, is clearly enough asser* 
ted by Dionysius, who mentions the distinct congregations 
in the extremest suburbs of the city. 

To make this hard testimony a little more pliant to 
this purpose, we have this ingenious comment upon it, 
that these f congregations were only a chappel of ease 
within the suburbs of Alexandria, for the conveniency of 
some members, who lived too far off to come to their one 
usual meeting house, so often as they held assemblies 
there; being every Lord's day, Saturday, Wednesday and 
Friday, and therefore it was concerted between the 
Bishop and his people, that they should erect this chappel, 
or these chappels for themselves; and,, upon solemn occa- 
sions, should all meet in the en?, mother Church, and so 
continue hat one congregational Church still. 

In which comment, we have a great example of what 
zeal will do for a bad cause. For, 

1st. This single chappel, or these distinct congrega- 
tions, for they are named in both capacities, are positive- 
ly said to be within the extremest suburbs, at least, of the 

* Enquiry, p . 39. 

t Ev rpoa^aoig rropp^epu) kuucvols Kara, pspos tcovzai cvvaywyai. Ad- 
vers. Gerraanum apud Euseb. 1. 7. c. 11. 
8* 



86 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

city of Alexandria; though Dionysius himself says only, 
* as it were within such suburbs; and thus you may re- 
member this wary author did, in another quotation, f 
leave out this little particle [<k, or as it were,] to very good 
purpose; and so it is here, for a chappel within the sub- 
urbs, though it were in the remotest of them all, in the 
vulgar acceptation of them amongst us, would suit pretty 
well with an English parish still, which more congrega- 
tions, a little farther off, would scarce do so well. And, 

2d. All this matter must be represented as a singular 
case, concerted between the Bishop and his people, that 
they should not only erect this chappel, or chappels for 
their own ease, but engage themselves upon solemn occa- 
sions to assemble in one and the same Church with him 
still, and so be a mere congregational Diocese, notwith- 
standing these multiplied congregations in it. For all 
which, there is not one tittle of warrant or authority in 
Dionysius's own narrative of it, but enough to shew a 
very different case from it. 

I have had occasion given to consider this whole case 
of the Church of Alerandria before, $ to which I refer the 
reader, for fuller information in it; and only remind him 
here, as a help to understand this short comment, that 
the place where these distinct congregations were held, 
was in and about Colluthio, in the region of Marseotis, 
which was a different Nomos, or district of Egypt, from 
that of Alexandria, both in the Macedonian and Roman 
division of it. Ptolemy distinguishes each of them as 
separate regions by themselves, as our learned § Dr. 

* its iv irpoa^eioig TroppwTcpw KZipivois Kara p.ipo$ avvayuycu . Euseb. ib. 
f Vide pag. 69. supra. 

% Vide supra, p. 6. & p. 49. 

* See Heylin's Cosmog. p. 929 . Edit. 2 . Loud . 1657. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCII, &C. 87 

Heylin also does, who tells us, that Plinthine and Hierax 
were the chief towns in the region called Maraeotica; and 
how large a country it was, and distinct from Alexandria, 
the contrivance of the Arians shews, who set up Ischyras, 
the pretended Presbyter, for another Bishop there; know- 
ing, doubtless, there was scope and district enough for 
another Diocese, even in the notion and practice of the 
fourth century, for they never presumed so far as to make 
him Bishop of Alexandria itself. But we need no other 
evidence, sure, in our present case, than that the holy 
Bishop of Alexandria we are now speaking of, was, at 
this time, confined in this very place in the condition of 
a banished man, and where, he tells us, * Christians never 
had resided before, till his name and sufferings had 
brought these several congregations of them into the 
country round about; it being a place infested with va- 
grants and robbers to that very day, and where he was 
much afflicted, as he says himself; to hear that he must 
go. Judge what a kind of suburb this must be to his own 
city of Alexandria then; I mean, in our modern and Eng- 
lish notion of a suburb, for whose sake this comment is 
made, and in which sense only the plausible contrivance 
of a chappel of ease could have any show of reason in it. 
For if he would allow it to be understood in the ancient 
acceptation of the word, wherein f suburbs comprehen- 
ded large adjacent countries, whose towns and villages 
were. the peculiar cures of Presbyters under the Bishop 
of the Diocese wherein they lay, we .should not need to 

* Epvpov firiv afa\$(x>v to %wptov raig h twv ohon:opm/]wvE vo%Xr}agat nai 
X^j-wv Ka]a^po[iais tyicsintvov rjxO^v Kai \iav f%aX£7T^va % Euseb, ib. 1. 7, 
C. II. 

t See Valesius's Annot. on these very words, Ka]a [ispos wvaywyai* 
In Euseb. ib. 



88 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

dispute about it. But such a primitive construction as 
this could no ways clear his point here, but would give 
his citizens' chappel of ease a most unwarrantable situa- 
tion; and yet it is plain, that Dionysius himself did not 
then take the place here mentioned for a suburb of this 
city, even in his extensive notion of it neither; else he 
had never said, as it were in remoter suburbs, had it ac- 
tually been there. Not to mention how unprecedented 
a thing it is, to affix the more modern term of a chappel 
of ease, to any place of public worship in those primitive 
times; where, I conceive, neither name nor thing is in 
any author to be found. 

To speak the least we can then in this present case; it 
is very plain, that some fair symptoms of a modern Epis- 
copal Church did appear in this primitive one of Alexan- 
dria; and no wonder it should be so, since the great 
Evangelist St. Mark had, in his own time, converted and 
settled many ccngregations of Christians in the very city 
itself, as * Eusebius tells us, who calls them Churches 
in the plural ncmber, without any cautious distinction of 
chappels of ease, or any thing in name or nature like it, 
to make them a parochial Diocese still, but took care to 
leave upon record, that one single Bishop successively 
presided over all. And one cannot but think it strange, 
to see an English pen so very industrious to deface the 
genuine characters of this primitive Church; when they 
do no more thnn bear witness to the venerable Apostol- 
ical constitution, Which the providence of God, and our 
own spiritual superiors, have provided for ourselves at 
home. 

But, once more, though great imperial cities may 

* E^X^fftaj i7« win AXtfcvSpuas cvs-qtxaadai. Euseb. Hist. Ec . 1. 2 r 
c. 16. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH j &C. 89 

make a show of being more than congregational Church- 
es, yet what can we say of Bishops placed in villages? 
Does not that prove, that their Diocese could be no 
greater? If it proves any thing, it must prove their ju- 
risdiction to reach no farther than their village too, 
which I never yet could hear of. To be a Bishop in a 
village, and of a village, are very different things; and 
should an Englishman read no more than the history of 
his native country only, he would find a Bishop's See, 
ever and anon, fixed in a village, as properly so called 
as any Episcopal village in ancient or modern history 
whatsoever, and yet his territories and dominions as 
fruitful in parishes and Churches under him, as any city 
Diocese in the land besides. 

But this argument is exhausted by the excellent Dr. 
Maurice long ago; and Episcopal villages surveyed with 
such patience, and the objections from them confuted 
with such learning and reason, in his admirable defence 
of Diocesan Episcopacy, that one would little think it 
should appear in public again. Yet I will not wholly 
pass by the authorities that are offered for it here. 

I shall join the two first of them together, because in 
the application here made of them, they really are an 
answer to one another. Clemens Romanus tells us, that 
* the Apostles 'preaching loth in city and country, consti- 
tuted Bishops and Deacons there. Thus he translates 
the words of Clemens in the margin, though through re- 
gions arid cities are at least as genuine a translation, as 
that; and by the precedency of regions in the text, they 
may more naturally be understood of provinces or coun- 
tries in the largest sense of them, than of mere country 

\ Ka]a %wpa? sv kcli tto\eis icripvaaov'Jig KaOi^avov a? iTiicrKQirsg fcai Skxkovss 
ZofjiKov airo KofjLavrjg KWjxrjs. Ep. 1. ad Corinth, p. 54. 



90 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

villages. But let us hear what St. Cyprian adds to this: 
Bishops, says he, were ordained throughout all provinces 
and all cities. 

Now by our author's quoting these two fathers to the 
same purpose, as he tells us he did, he has all the reason 
in the world to understand St. Clemens' countries, and 
the provinces mentioned by St. Cyprian, to be the same 
thing. And since the latter never understood provinces 
in any other sense, than as large tracts of countries, con- 
taining cities, towns and villages in them; so by parity of 
reason, he ought to allow, that St. Clemens meant such 
sort of countries too; and then both cities and countries 
might originally have Bishops set over them, and not a 
village have a Bishop in it still; which I have only taken 
notice of, to shew how little these two quotations prove 
the thing they were intended for; since, if they were 
equivalent, or much to the same purpose, as our author 
says they are, they make no proof, I think, of village 
Bishoprics at all. But I have * elsewhere otherways 
accounted for the doubtful and undetermined sense of St. 
Clemen's Bishops, in the age he wrote in; to which I may 
refer the reader for farther satisfaction in the case. 

Another argument there is from an instance of a Bish- 
op in f Comane, which, I am free to own, the historian 
calls a village, and dispute not, but it really was so; for 
I have shewn above, that villages may have a Bishop's 
See in them, though examples in antiquity are rarely to 
be found indeed, and yet their jurisdiction be large enough 
too; and that Comane was of that kind, may the rather 
be presumed, % since it appears, that that particular place 

* Vide supra, ch. 1. p. I9> 21. 

* ZwIiKov 7]tto Kofjiavg k(x)jx7]s. Euseb. II. jE. I, 5, c. 16. 

J Episcopus Comanenus memoratur in Epistcria Episcoporum Pam- 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 91 

had a Bishop's seat in it, even in the fifth century, and 
at the time of the council of Chalcedon; when, I believe, 
no man thinks there was any one Bishop in the Christian 
Church, that had no more than a single village for his 
Diocese. In a word, it is strange to see what narrow 
search is made, to find here and there an instance of this 
kind, amongst so many thousand Bishoprics as the histo- 
ry of the Church affords; whereas, had villages been 
Bishops' Sees by Apostolical institution, wherever any 
congregation could be gathered in them, the advantage 
in number, one would think, should soon have been on 
their side, in the general account of Episcopal Churches 
in the Christian world. 

But it is surmised still, that theie must have been many 
Bishops of villages, and very obscure villages too, among 
those 78 Bishops that sat in council with St. Cyprian, in 
the year 258, because we do not meet with the names of 
many of their Sees in Ptolemy, or the old geographers. 
Now, whatever may be missing in the ancient geogra- 
phy, here referred to, it is plain, that every Diocese, 
named in that council, is very learnedly accounted for 
by the venerable editor of the Oxford edition of St. Cy- 
prian's works, in his notes upon it; partly from those an- 
cient geographers themselves, and partly from other 
authors of unquestionable credit in the case; such as 
Antoninus, Optatus, St. Austin, Victor Vitensis, the Noti- 
tia Africae, Collatio Carthaginensis, and the like. And 
as they are generally styled cities in direct terms; so, if 
one in twenty of them should be suspected to be other- 
wise, it neither proves their Dioceses to be single congre- 
gations, as we have seen before, nor should be thought 

phylias ad Leonem Aug; See Vales, in Euseb, ubi supra, and Con- 
ciU Chalced, Part 3. p. 391. 



92 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

strange in the confines of those inhospitable countries, 
where the natives rarely multiplied their cities, yet were 
numerous in their lesser dispersed corporations, and be- 
coming Christians must have their Bishops seated in the 
most convenient mansion for them all. Such instances 
in the more uncivilized and desert parts of the world are 
unquestionably to be found. But to take a model of the 
Christian Church from them, is peculiar only to a few 
authors in our own times. 

To close this cause and the second Chapter together, 
we have Justin Martyr's Sundays-Assemblies once more 
recommended to our better consideration, and St. Igna- 
tius' strict charge to the Magnesia ns to keep in close 
union with their Bishop; which, without going all to his 
single house of prayer, our Enquirer seems to think im- 
practicable. But how different the sense of those holy 
fathers is from what is here put upon them, I have shewn 
at large * before; and hope so genuine a construction of 
them, being plainly conformable also to the principles 
and practice of the Catholic Church of Christ, will find 
no hard admittance with any peaceful friend of the like 
primitive constitution in our own native country and 
times. 



CHAP. III. 

ENQUIRY INTp THE CONSTITUTION, &C. OF THE 
PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 

The Bishop's flock, we have seen in the former chap- 
ters, is moderate and small enough. His duty is now 
represented to the full. The particulars are many, and 

*Vide supra, p. 37, and p. 39. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 93 

yet but little controverted, as this learned author observes, 
on either side; they are with great exactness summed up 
in this place, to introduce the absolute necessity of his 
residing constantly upon his cure; which in the next par- 
agraph is so earnestly insisted upon. And in that view 
of them, I cannot but take notice, that the several acts 
of the Episcopal function, here mentioned, are many of 
them so represented by the authors he quotes about them, 
as to imply an inherent right in the Bishop, of ordering 
and disposing the discharge of them, as much as a per- 
sonal obligation upon him to discharge them all himself. 
Thus, for instance, in the act of preaching; Origen here 
quoted, to prove it was the Bishop's duty, * elsewhere 
informs us, that the Bishop commanded him to preach, 
and enjoined him the very subject he should preach upon: 
(Enquiry, page 58.) which shews the Bishop to be as 
much, at least, a spiritual guardian of the holy ordinance, 
obliged by his function to provide effectually for the do- 
ing of it, as that he was personally bound to do it himself; 
and allowing but one congregation in a Diocese, it was 
a temporary dispensation to him, from performing that 
duty; and what could any one say, should that Bishop 
have oftner done such an innocent thing again? f Soz- 
omen goes farther indeed, and tells us, it was a custom in 
the Church of Rome, for neither Bishop nor any one else 
to preach there; upon which the learned Valesius notes, 
that no sermon of a Bishop of that Church was ever ex- 
tant before those of Leo the Great, which was in the fifth 
century, and quotes Cassiodorus to confirm what Sozo- 

* Origen. in Ezek. Horn. 3. Origen. Horn, de Engastrim. p. 28, 
vol. 1. 

t Ovfs <k <5 eitiaKoiros vrz a\\os ti$ ivOah i-rn EKK\[*ciaz Zi&acKit- Soa«« 
om. Hist. Eccl. 1. 7, c. 19, and Vales. Annot. ib. 
9 



94 AN OKIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

men said, an authentic witness, who was both senator 
and historian, in the city of Rome itself. I infer no more 
from this, than what barely relates to the case before me, 
namely, that the Bishops' continual preaching to their 
people, which our Enquirer here * asserts, was not uni- 
versal, at least, in the primitive Churches themselves. 

Again, as to the administration of the holy sacrament 
of baptism, Tertullian is here brought to prove it an act 
of the Bishop's function, and undoubtedly it is included 
in it. But let us take it in the ancient father's own words, 
which are these; f The right of giving Baptism is in the 
Bishop, and from thence in the Preslyters and Deacons, 
if he authorize them for it, I only note this language of 
the ancients, and this practice in the primitive times, to 
shew that the flock of Christ might be fed, and the ordi- 
nary saving ordinances of the Church administered in a 
Diocese, though the Bishop should not constantly act in 
his own person; and that he was not wanting to his func- 
tion, where he effectually provided that every act of it 
was performed to the edification and occasions of his 
people. Personal presence is undoubtedly the truest and 
most faithful means of discharging any trust in the world, 
and much more of this high and heavenly one; but it is 
more extraordinary, to hear it pressed so hard from a 
Congregational hand, who makers a Diocese but a single 
auditory, and though there should be forty or fifty Pres* 
byters, which, in his account of them, are as truly Apos- 
tolical Bishops in their order, as the very supreme one 
himself, yet cannot allow that single pastor, upon the most 
important affair, to be absent for a while, though he 
should depute them all to watch over his little flock, 

* Enq. p. 44. $ 2. 

h Tertul. de Baptis. c. 17. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 05 

which could make but one congregation for them. But, 
He urges St. Cyprian's awful opinion in the case, who 
reckons this sin of non-residency, as one occasion of God's 
wrath upon the Church, in the Decian persecution. And 
I believe indeed, it would be thought no better of, even 
in this, or in any other age besides, if we should take in 
all the other aggravations that holy martyr there charges 
it withal. He complains, * that Bishops left their Dioceses, 
to follow sordid merchandize abroad, to 'purchase farms 
by fraud and extorsion, to enrich themselves by use upon 
use, neglecting to relieve the brethren that were starving in 
the Church. Such non-residency might draw down judg- 
ments upon a Church indeed, but will hardly prove, that 
no occasions, how just, innocent, or important soever, can 
excuse the temporary absence of a Bishop from his See, 
where every District in his Diocese has subordinate pas- 
tors provided for it, to administer every necessary ordi- 
nance of the Church to all his people in it. That holy 
Bishop and martyr, we know, was a considerable time 
absent himself; the occasion was extraordinary, it is true, 
and I mention it for no other end than this, that matter of 
fact may inform us, a Diocese is capable to be provided 
for, in such a case as that; and the example of that bless- 
ed Bishop will shew us how: f For though absent in 
body, says he, / was neither wanting in spirit, in act, or 
admonitions to them; but by my Episcopal authority, I still 

* Episcopi plurimi cle relicta cathedra, piebe deserta, per allenas 
provincias oberrantes, negotiationis quasstuosBe nun din as aucupari; 
esurientibus in Ecclesia fratribus nou subvenire, habere argentum lar- 
giter veiie, fundos insidiosis fr audi bus rapere, usuris muhiplicandibus 
foenus augere. Cypr. de Lapsis, § 4. Edit. Oxon. p. 123. 

t Absens corpore, nee spiritu, nee aclu, nee monitis meis defui — 
Presb3aeris et Diaconibus non defuit saeerdotii vigor ut quidam minus 
disciplines rne.ru res; cornprimerentur, intercedentibus nobis. Ep. 20 



\)b AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

restrained such Presbyters and Deacons, as were remiss 
and negligent in the discipline of the Church, In a word, 
therefore, those spiritual stewards of the Lord's household 
will have a hard account to give, they may be sure of it, 
if whensoever their Lord cometh, he finds them not 
watching. But by what rules of equity, that watchful- 
ness he enjoins them, shall be judged acceptable at the 
last day, is reserved to himself alone, who knows the 
heart, and knows the occasions of man, and judgeth not 
by appearance, but judgeth according to truth. This is 
matter of awe enough to every servant in his family; and, 
at the same time, proves how unwarrantable it is too, for 
any but their Lord and Master alone, to judge of their 
service: As the excellent St. Cyprian elsewhere speaks, 
even in respect of one Bishop censuring another. 

The next enquiry is, how a Bishop was anciently elect- 
ed into a vacant See; which is thus determined for us : 
1st, * "That all the members of the Parish or Bishopricy 
for we must admit them for equivalent terms still, both 
Clergy and Laity, commonly met, to choose a fit person 
for his successor, to whom they might commit the care and* 
government of their Church. 2dly, Whomsoever the peo- 
ple had thus elected a Bishop, they presented to their 
neighboring Bishops for their approbation and consent, 
lest the people through ignorance or affection should 
choose an unfit or unable man for that sacred office, (as 
our learned author modestly surmises for them,) it being 
supposed, (says he,) that a synod of Bishops might be 
wiser judges in the case. 3dly, A Bishop thus elected 
and confirmed, is to have his ordination or instalment, for 
these must pass for equivocal words too, in his. own 

* Enqu ry, p. 46, 47, and 49. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 97 

Church, by the neighboring Bishops, and that by impo- 
sition of their hands." 

These were the three necessary requisites, it seems, for 
the filling of any vacant Bishopric in the primitive times; 
and the two former, so equally necessary, that it is * con- 
cluded, "Neither the choice of the Bishops of the Voisin- 
age, without the consent of the people, nor the election 
of the people, without the approbation of those Bishops, 
was sufficient and valid of itself: " And after both, the 
ceremony of ordination or instalment was to finish all. 

Here is an excellent primitive practice, with variety of 
reading, and not a little art, I fear, represented to us. 
And, because it has somewhat more than ordinary rela- 
tion to some unfortunate controversies in our own times, 
which our ingenious author so affectionately desired to 
compose and heal for us, I must take leave to observe, 
that it is not the ancient practice of the Church which 
has so much occasioned unhappy controversies in the 
case, as the representation of it in such a singular man- 
ner as we have it here. By examining the particulars 
apart, we shall see more of it. 

In the vacancy of a See, says he, all the members of it, 
Clergy and Laity, met together, to choose a fit person for 
a successor; and it need not be disputed between us, but 
that in many Dioceses, though not in all, they commonly 
did -so; provided that by choosing here, we may be al- 
lowed to understand what our Enquirer himself fairly 
intimates to us, that it was no more than to pitch upon a 
person acceptable to themselves, whom they might pro- 
pose and recommend to the neighboring Bishops, for their 
consent and approbation, for his own scheme runs so, 
that is, for those Bishops to accept or refuse him, as they 

* lb. p. 49. 

9* 



93 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

should think fit; for where we sue for approbation or 
consent, we must allow a right and power to disapprove 
and dissent too. 

But then the next words in the Enquiry run higher 
than so, and may mislead the reader, if he be not well 
aware of it. They met, says he, to choose a successor, to 
whom they might commit the care and goverrunent of their 
Church. This is somewhat more, sure, than preparing 
to recommend to others; it is plainly contributing to them 
a considerable share, at least, of original right and pow- 
er invested in them, to dispose of their Bishopric to the 
person they should please to choose. And we need not 
doubt, but that our learned author intended they should 
be understood so; since in another * place, where he 
treats directly of the acts and powers of the Lay-mem- 
bers of a Church, h? affirms in plain terms, that they had 
a power not only to elect the person of their Bishop, but 
to depose him too, in case he proved scandalous, heretical, 
or the like. 

Now what this Lay-power was, in constituting Bish- 
ops of old, and from whence it eame, is the point in 
question; and for the easier solution of it, we need only 
carefully observe these .two things. 1st, What the holy 
Scriptures themselves teach us concerning the divine 
institution of this sacred office and power of constituting 
and ordaining Bishops and Pastors in the Church, togeth- 
er with the manner it was first executed and, put in prac- 
tice in the very Apostolical age itself. And, 2dly, What 
account we meet with of the same thing, in the following 
Ecclesiastical records of fathers, councils, or historians, 
in the ages very near approaching to the first. 

* See Enquiry, p. 103, 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 1)9 

These two great authorities, impartially compared to- 
gether, will teach us to distinguish fairly, between a di- 
vine 1 r'ght, authority, and power, of ordaining elders in 
the Church, completely and absolutely conveyed, by the 
fountain of all power, to the single persons of the first 
spiritual rulers of it, without the concurrence of any 
popular election, on the one hand; and the wise and pru- 
dent rules and methods which the succeeding governors 
in many parts of the Church laid down for themselves in 
the use and practice of that ordaining power, so entirely 
conveyed down to them, on the other. And if this short 
and clear distinction were but duly attended to, and 
without prejudice applied to the present dispute before 
us, the adversaries on both sides might happily find their 
account in it, and come nearer to compromise their fatal, 
though unnecessary difference about it. For, if the 
former part or member of this distinction appear true, 
which I shall particularly consider by and by, .then such: 
as disallow the necessity of popular elections in the case, 
call them by what name we please, must, at least, have a 
fair appearance of a very important plea, even from the 
holy scriptures themselves, for their opinion of it; and on 
the other side, if very primitive Bishops, succeeding in 
the places, character, and power of those earlier prede- 
cessors of theirs in the Christian Church, did form rules 
or canons by mutual consent amongst themselves, not to 
exercise that ordaining power and office, so invested in 
them, any otherwise than in the presence, and with the 
general approbation of the Church or people, over which- 
the person so ordained, was intended to preside; then the 
advocates for this popular claim, interest, or right, call it 
what you will, of bearing some part also, in electing and 
constituting a Bishop over them, may have plausible 



100 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

precedents of ecclesiastical antiquity to recommend their 
plea for it too: Which two points, I humbly conceive, 
contain the main substance of what is generally offered 
on one side or the other; at least, they seem to me, more 
immediately and directly to answer all the reasonings of 
our learned enquirer about it; who, through all his man- 
agement of this argument, grounds his whole scheme 
upon such ancient ecclesiastical authorities alone; and as 
for texts of holy scripture, or any authentic charter of 
popular election contained in them, at the first divine or 
apostolical institution of it, has though fit not to mention 
one; as the * reader may see, by consulting the referen- 
ces noted in the margin here. 

To begin then with the former part, or member of the 
distinction itself; which is this, that the holy scriptures 
set forth to us a divine light, authority, and power of or- 
daining elders in the Church, completely and absolutely 
conveyed, from the fountain of all power in it, to the 
single persons of the first spiritual rulers of it, without 
any previous or concurrent election of the people in it; 
and farther, that the appostles themselves, or apostolical 
men, eminently so called, and adopted into the number of 
them, did accordingly both execute and convey the same 
ordaining power, in the same manner, unto others at 
their first planting of Christian Churches in the world. 
This evidence of fact, I shall briefly shew, the holy scrip- 
tures do set forth to us. 

And first, as to the peculiar apostolic college itself, 
which we know was first consecrated and ordained to 
this holy function, as the spring and fountain from whence 
all the rest is undoubtedly derived, I presume it will not 

* See Enq. p . 23, 24, and p. 46, to p. 49. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 101 

be disputed, but that they received a fulness of power for 
ordinations, as well as every other part of their ministe- 
rial office, from the blessed Jesus himself, whether before 
or after his resurrection, without any imaginary appear- 
ance of such a popular choice or approbation in the case. 
And therefore I do but barely name the thing; though I 
must make this short remark upon it, that it is no incon- 
siderable circumstance to the point in hand, that the 
catholic Church was thus founded upon governors and 
pastors ordained to rule over every part of it, before there 
was any formed Church or settled congregation in the 
world to have any hand in it. This comes as near the 
root, I am sure, of all divine right or power in ordina- 
tions, as it is possible to do. And in what other sense 
can we reasonably conceive those first plenipotentiaries, 
of Church power could understand their blessed Lord's; 
express commission to them, * as my father hath sent me, 
even so send I you, than as a personal power to ordain 
others in the same manner likewise, according as the 
occasion of converting all nations, and gathering Chur- 
ches in them, where there were none before, did most 
naturally require. 

1 That they did so understand, and execute their com- 
mission so too, if a very short digression may be allow'd 
me here, that one venerable record of Antiquity, which 
our enquirer himself f singled out to prove the contrary 
by, will manifestly shew; I mean St, Clement'' s first epistle 
to the Corinthians, where the holy father's words are 
these. % The apostles, says he, continued [or ordained] 

* Job. xx. 21. 
-t See Eiiq.p, 49. 

X Oi Atros'loXoi Kaidi^avev rag anapxas avruv u$ £iriCKo-u$ kcli SiaKovag 

roiv fjiXXov'Juxv vitfevtiv. Clem, ad Corinth . Ep, 1. p . 54, 55. 



102 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

Bishops and deacons for such as [were not yet converted, 
but] should, in some time to come, be brought over to the 
faith. There needs no comment upon this testimony; 
for sure, whatever imaginary people may be suggested 
to have bore a part in the election or ordination of such 
Bishops and deacons as those, it is plain enough, the 
people they were afterwards to preside over, or minister 
amongst them, could have none at all; which is the only 
thing contended for, and should be proved, in the case 
before us. 

But, to return to scripture evidence again. As the 
principal apostles themselves / according to the testimony 
of that truly primitive father indeed, for he was contem- 
porary with many of them, did unquestionably constitute 
and ordain pastors in the Church, without any suffrage 
or election of the people in it; so the holy scriptures af- 
firm no less of such as were adopted into that sacred 
college, dignified with that title by the Holy Ghost, and 
called of God himself to the holy function, as well as the 
blessed twelve were; I mean St. Paul and St. Barnabas, 
whose ordinations are particularly recorded for us in 
holy writ itself. The text which mentions them is ob- 
vious enough, and has seldom escaped the observation of 
any who have wrote on this argument, on one side or the 
other. It is Acts. xiv. 23. where, in our translation, 
we read thus. * And when they had ordained them elders 
in every Church, and had prayed with fisting, they com- 
mended them to the Lord, on whom they believed, I know 
the original word, here used for this apostolical ordina- 
tion, is with great assurance insisted upon by the advo- 
cates for popular election, as including in it the votes or 

* Act. xvi. 23. Kai x^polovrjcravjis hi av^oig irpta6v7ipss Kaja £Ktc\t)- 
ciav, irpoav^a pivot \>.i)a vrj^imv irapidevro av^Jsg ra) Kvpim us ov nettfWie&tvav 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 108 

suffrages of the people, because it signifies the stretching 
out, or holding up, of the hand; which ceremony was com- 
monly used by the ancient Greeks, to express such an 
action of the people in giving their voice or suffrage 
either in courts of judicature, or at the choice of magis- 
trates amongst them. This is the main stress of all the 
glosses I meet with, to evade the clear evidence of this 
text for the apostles ordaining those elders by their own 
free choice and authority alone. The clear evidence of 
the text, I call it; for if there be any regular and gram- 
matical construction of the holy penmens' words to be al- 
lowed at all, it must necessarily be this; that the same 
persons who held forth their hands for the act of ordina- 
tion here, did, in the words immediately following, coin- 
mend the people, then present, to the Lord, in whom they 
believed. The word, commended, in the latter clause, 
and the persons who ordained, or stretched out their 
hands for orders, if we had rather translate it so, in the 
former, having as direct a reference to, and connexion 
with one another, and appropriating the action of the 
one to the persons of the other, as entirely as it is possible 
for true Syntax to do in any sentence whatsoever; and 
therefore, unless the people commended themselves to the 
Lord in the latter clause, they could not be included 
amongst the persons that stretched out their hands for 
ordination in the former; for they that did one, as clearly 
as language can make it, did the other also. Besides, 
though it might signify either, yet it must signify both 
here, if it imply the people's votes, else no imposition of 
hands in this ordination; and how absurd is that? 

I might balance, at least, all the proof that could be 
given for a popular election necessarily implied in] this 
original word, by a cloud of witnesses both of Greek and 



104 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

Jewish writers, in and about the time that the new tes- 
tament was writen; who familiarly apply the same word, 
not to the votes or suffrages of a multitude only, but to 
the bare authoritative act of a single person, nay even 
of * God himself, in constituting or ordaining officers to 
the respective places or purposes that they treated of. 
I might add also the venerable and received authorities 
of Christian fathers, historians, critics, and gramma- 
rians, eminent both in ancient and modern ages of the 
Church, who affirm the word to be so taken in the an- 
cient ecclesiastical notion of it: insomuch that the inquisi- 
tive Suicer, who was friend enough to popular elections, 
amongst other significations of the word, undertakes to 
prove by many testimonies and examples, f that the 
stretching out of the hand included in it, imports no more 
than barely creating, constituting and designing persons 
to the place or office intended for them, as distinct from 
suffrage and election; and, which is not a little to the 
purpose, produces this very text, at the head of many 
others authorities, for a clear testimony and example of 
it. But they who would see a plain and compendious 
account of the authorities I here appeal to, need only 
read the excellent doctor Hammond's annotations on this 
single text, and those of the late Bishop Beveridge on 
the first Apost. Can. But, 

I have chosen rather to leave the sacred text to its 
own naked evidence, than amuse the reader with numer- 

• So the holy scilpturc attributes it to Gcd's choice of witnesses,, 
Acts k. 41. 

t Exemplis et testimoniis prcebemns x £ tp°7oveiv nihil alud declarars 
quaru conatituere, creare designare; patet hoc ex Act, xiv. 23, ubi 
<ie Paulo "et Barna*a, xupo^oviiaav)^ av'Joig irpzaSv^vpys Kaja eKicXrjffiav* 
Suicer.Thesaur. Ecc. in verbo x^poloviu)^ et in voce xzipolovia. Num. & 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 105 

ous quotations of that kind, which are so readily to be 
found elsewhere; especially, since authorities of that na- 
ture, though justly thought to have a considerable weight 
in them by unprejudiced men, yet, I know not for what 
reasons, are very often slightly passed over by some of 
the greatest patrons of popular election and the congre- 
gational cause. Witness that remarkable passage in 
the celebrated J. Owen's plea for scripture ordination-, 
who, speaking of valid ordinations, thus explains him- 
self. By valid, says he, J mean, not what old Canons 
make so, (and yet it is remarkable by the by that our 
learned Enquirer urges such authorities in the case) hut 
what the scriptures determine to be so. Those sacred ora- 
cles, which are of divine inspiration, and not arbitrary 
Canons which are of weak men's devising, are the founda- 
tion of our faith, and the infallible standard, by which 
truth and error must be tried; which though it be an un- 
accountable contempt of those venerable records of the 
Church, and of all other human authority besides; yet 
so far as any original right or power in that solemn act 
of ordination can be claimed, as divine, he may be own^ 
ed 10 speak a very important truth in it; for after that 
sacred code was once complete and sealed, I know of no 
such authentic power as that granted to any, either 
in part, or in whole. 

I shall therefore pursue the evidence of those holy ora- 
cles a little farther still, and prove from thence, that as the 
apostles received and exercised such an ordaining power, 
independent of any popular election in it; so they convey- 
ed the same, without any such condition annexed to it, 
to the individual persons of some of the chief pastors of 
the- Churches which were planted by them. The two 
noted instances of this kind, within the sacred Canon it- 
10 



106 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

self, are Timothy and Titus; in whose commission and 
instructions together, which are very particular, we 
know, in the point of ordinations above all things, we 
might reasonably expect to hear of this material right 
and privilege of the people, if such a right there was, and 
not without some solemn directions, one would think, for 
a due regard to it, lest their ordinations should prove de- 
fective and invalid, after all the authority the apostle had 
given them, for want of this popular election in them. 
But that neither their commissions or instructions for or- 
daining Bishops and deacons in the Church, do either 
require, or imply any such elections in them, will ap- 
pear evident, I think, from a very few texts, which im- 
mediately relate to them. 

The commission to Timothy is directly referred to in 
2 Tim. ii. 2. The things that thou hast heard of me among 
many witnesses, says the great apostle, the same commit 
thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also. 
The substance of Titus's commission is, at Titus i. 5. 
For this cause left I thee in Crete, says the same apostle, 
that thou shouldsi set in order the things that are icanting, 
and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee. 

Nothing can be plainer, I think, than these three things 
are here. 1st. That there was a full right and power 
of ordaining elders in the Church unquestionably inves- 
ted in these primitive pastors of the apostolical Churches. 
2d. That each of them in their single persons are ex- 
pressly specified, addressed, and pointed to, for the dis- 
charge and execution of it, (commit thou to faithful men^ 
<$fc. and that thou shouldsi ordain elders, <fyc. as Iliad ap- 
pointed thee.) And 3d. That there is not the least direc- 
tion, or so much as hint, or intimation, given to either of 
them to call in the assistance, or wait the approbation of 



TIIE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 107 

the people in the case; neither texts, nor contexts, if we 
please to look into them, will suggest the least imagina- 
tion of any such thing: And therefore, without farther 
remark upon them, 

I proceed, in the next place, to consider the larger 
instructions given to them by the great apostle, for the 
due execution of their important charge. These lie dis- 
persed in the several epistles directed to them. And 
here, if any where, we might hope to find the secret of a 
popular election enjoined in all their ordinations. But, 
on the contrary, instead of clear instructions for it, we 
find they had the strongest cautions given them against 
it, that a holy prophet and apostle together, whose com- 
mission alone they acted by, could well have left with 
them. For St. Paul, instructing Timothy in the genius 
of the people of the Province he had placed him in, in 
plain terms foretells him what they would one day do, if 
they were left to their own elections, and might choose 
pastors for themselves. The time will come, says he, 
when they will not endure sound doctrine, hut after their 
own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having 
itching ears ( (2 Tim. iv. 3.) This was a pretty fair warn- 
ing, one would think, both to Timothy himself, and to 
his successors too, for it was an indefinite prophecy, in 
point of time, to them all, that they should beware of 
trusting too much to the votes and suffrages of the people, 
in that particular affair especially of providing pastors 
for themselves. And that Titus had a caution to this 
purpose much of the same kind with this, is visible 
enough in St. Paul's confirming the Cretian prophet's hard 
testimony of his own countrymen, that they were always 
liars, evil leasts, and slow bellies, (Tit. i. 12.) For that 
the Apostle meant it not of such as were unconverted 



108 



AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 



only, but chiefly of such as were then become members 
of the Church, and indeed of them alone, in respect of 
the use he made of it, is manifest from the words immedi- 
ately following, wherein he enjoins Titus to rebuke them 
sharply, that they might he found in the faith; which, sure- 
ty* was to judge and censure them for it; and that had 
been contrary to his own doctrine in another place, if 
they were not members of the Church. For (1 Cor. v. 
12.) he disowns his right of Judging them that are with- 
out; what have I to do, says he, to judge them that are 
without? If the lay-members of the Cretian Church 
therefore had such a character as this fastened upon 
them by the very apostle himself, which, at least, must 
affect a considerable part of them, let any man judge 
what probability there is, that Titus should have it given 
him in his instructions to let the people choose their pas- 
tors for themselves, or that he should take up that method 
himself in conferring holy orders on any in that island. 

It is true, indeed, they have this excellent instruction 
amongst the rest, that Bishops and deacons must be prov- 
ed first, and found to be blameless; (1 Tim. iii. 2. 10. and 
Tit. i. 6.) which does undoubtedly suppose a careful in- 
quisition and wise trial to be made of the personal qualifi- 
cations of every candidate for holy orders. And upon 
this indefinite advice, and single intimation, which, when 
we have said the most of it that we can, leaves the whole 
matter to the discretional judgment of the ordainers 
themselves, do many advocates for popular election 
ground their plea, for a necessary appeal to the votes and 
suffrages of the people in all ordinations. Nay, our 
learned Enquirer himself, though he offered no scripture 
authority for it, when he was directly treating of the 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 109 

point; yet when * he comes to the method of his consis- 
tory, in examining into the life and conversation of such 
candidates for holy orders, he first tells us, they u-crc pro- 
posed to the people for their testimony, and then imme- 
diately subjoins the former of these texts as an apostoli- 
cal Canon, to countenance, at least, if not to enjoin the 
practice of it. 

In answer to which, I offer these few considerations. 

1st. That the holy apostle's meaning in it appears not 
to be so, by the cautions given to Timothy and Titus, 
which I mentioned but now. 

2d. That the nature of the thing itself, namely, the 
qualifications required in this case, seem very unsuitable 
to such a popular or congregational inquest as this. 
And, 

Lastly. That our judicious Enquirer himself, where he 
most explains his sense upon this subject, does not a lit- 
tle countenance the contrary opinion of it. 

The first of these particulars, of the apostle's sense of 
it, is cleared already, and needs no repetition. 

The second, which is the nature of the thing itself, or 
the qualifications required in the persons to be ordained, 
(and note, episcopal orders in the sense of the enquiry are 
included here) I shall take from the Enquirer's own pen. 
f The gifts , or qualifications, says he, touching which a 
candidate for the ministry was examined, may be reduced 
to these four heads, 

1st. His age, to prevent admitting a novice or a strip- 
ling, as he explains the thing. 

2d. His condition in the world, in respect of beings 
free from all secular employments; or mundane affairs,. 

* See Enquiry, p . 88. 
t See Enquiry, p . 84, &e. 
10* 



110 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

3d. His conversation, that he might be known to be 
meek and humble, and of an unspotted and exemplary- 
life. 

4th. His understanding, that he might be of a good 
capacity, and fit to teach others; under which head, he 
falls in clearly with Origen and Clemens Alexandrinus, 
that all sorts of human learning, and logic, and philoso- 
phy in particular, were not only useful, but necessary for 
a Presbyter; they were amiable, and profitable for him, 
as his own words are, at pag. 94. 

The ingenious author, who drew up these particulars, 
was very sensible, I doubt not, that three in four of them 
needed no appealing to any congregation of men to be 
satisfied in them. Little need of bringing whole multi- 
tudes to a poll, to know what, or where abouts, the age 
of any candidate should be; or whether involved in secu- 
lar or worldly affairs, or no; and more absurd still, to 
enquire there of his skill or abilities in those depths of 
human learning, which are thought proper for him. 

The only qualification, then, which could fall under 
the cognizance of such judges as those, must be that of 
his moral virtues, or of his life and conversation; and 
why should the Bishops of different provinces be called 
in to judge of that? No man ever questioned, I think, 
but that neighbourhoods or societies, friends or familiars, 
whether laity or clergy, which any man whatsoever has 
been more familliarly conversant with, are the properest 
evidence, before all others, to give a just and satisfactory 
information of this kind of qualification. But how, and 
in what manner, would a reasonable man conceive such 
information should be had? By an universal suffrage 
and critical majority of voices, in so mixed a multitude^ 
Sure, if natural reason, and common sense and experience 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. Ill 

do not startle at that, yet our blessed Master would 
teach us to be very cautious, at least, in such hazardous 
trials as these; when he plainly tells us, there will be 
tares as well as wheat, and it is well, if we must not un- 
derstand it in more than equal proportion too, in that very 
field which is a symbol of the kingdom of heaven, or of 
the visible Church of God upon earth; and to measure 
out one and the other without distinction, as this case 
supposes, could have little good come of it. Not this 
man. but Bar abbas, is a tremendous instance of this kind, 
in the most eminent congregation of the only Church of 
God then amongst men. And whosoever shall seriously 
consider, how expressly the spirit has foretold us, what 
degeneracy of faith, what corruption of manners, what 
perilous times should come in the latter days, when 
men should be false accusers, and haters of those that 
are good, and the like; yet still retaining the form of 
godliness, though without the power of it; whosoever, I 
say, should impartially consider this, must be inclined to 
think, that the wisdom of God, who both foresaw and 
foretold it all, should scarcely ever grant such an un- 
changeable charter to every individual member of a 
Church, to approve his Bishops and pastors for him, in 
all generations to come; as we see, indeed, there appears 
no footsteps of it in the holy code of his laws, by the view 
we have already had of them. The wise heathen speaks 
a natural truth, not very foreign to this purpose, which I 
am afraid the Christians in our age would find hard to 
contradict. * Things do not go so well with mankind, 
said the excellent Seneca, that the best please the most 
where number and multitude is, it is an argument rather 

* Non tarn bene cum rebus hmnanis agitur,, ut meliora pluribus 
placeant, argumentum pessimi, turba est. Seneca de vit. Beat, c. 2. 



112 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

of the worst. The inference from all I have said here is 
this, that notwithstanding the whole corporation, or so- 
ciety, whether sacred or civil, which any person is an 
immediate member of, and the whole region or district 
he ordinary lives and converses in, be the most suitable 
places and persons from whence we should seek a moral 
character of him; yet a few select ones out of all the rest, 
if judiciously chosen, and with an upright mind applied 
to, are as likely, at least, to give a just and sober account 
in the case, as the promiscuous votes of the mixed mul- 
titude together can reasonably be thought to do. And if 
what I have said seem too little for it, I shall farther add, 
what I learn from the judicious enquirer himself, name- 
ly, that ignorance and affection, that is, weakness in un- 
derstanding, and bias upon the will, are generally to 
be found amongst the vulgar people of any Christian 
Church or congregation whatsoever. 

And this will clear, I hope, the third particular I 
promised to make cat, that the Enquirer himself, where 
he most impartially explains his sense upon this subject, 
does not a little countenance our opinion of it. For these 
are the two qualities he * fastens upon the common peo- 
ple, even of primitive Churches and congregations in gen- 
eral, as I just mentioned once before. They served his 
turn then indeed in another view of the case. He was 
representing %b us the primitive custom of neighbouring 
Bishops being called in, as necessary to consent to the 
people's election of a Bishop; and because it would eclipse 
the popular power, to speak out the whole of their busi- 
ness, office, and authority, in constituting a Bishop over 
them, he smooths it over with this gloss; and one or two 

* See Enquiry, p. 48: 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 113 

more not much unlike it, which I may consider after- 
wards; I suppose, says he, the reason of their presenting 
him to those Bishops for their consent was this, lest the 
people, through ignorance, or affection, should choose an 
unfit, or an unable man for that office. What manner of 
representation this is of an episcopal part and office in 
primitive ordinations, I shall not stay to observe now; I 
only make good the observation I raised from it to the 
present purpose, viz. That he charges the congrega- 
tion with suspicion of such ignorance and affection in the 
choice of their Bishop, that they needed better judges to 
be called in, as in another place he makes them subject 
to giddiness, envy or pride, pag. 105. He may apply, it 
is likely, the weakness of their understanding to the 
point of judging of the candidate's human learning only; 
but the bias of their affection, which with equal justice 
perhaps he supposes to be in them, together with the other 
qualities of giddiness, envy, or pride, can never pass for 
a tolerable disposition in them, to give their suffrage in 
any other qualification whatsoever. And therefore I 
think it can be no injury to say, that where his sense is 
most impartially explained, he countenances, at least, 
our present opinion in the case. 

Now, to sum up all that has been offered from scrip- 
ture evidence relating to the argument before us, the par- 
ticulars are briefly these. 

1st. That the principal Apostles themselves were un- 
questionably chosen and ordained supreme governors and 
pastors of all that did, or should believe in their time, 
without the concurrence or consent of any. And this was 
the root and fountain of all Church power granted from 
above. 

2d. That the same Apostles must have had the like 



114 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

ordaining power personally and entirely invested in 
themselves alone, upon these two accounts; 1st, Because 
their commission, in this respect, was, in express words, 
the very transcript of the Father's to their Lord and Mas- 
ter, who sent them, as my Father hath sent trie, even so 
send I you, John xx. 21. And, 2d, Because their pasto- 
ral work in converting unconverted nations, and consti- 
tuting or ordaining spiritual governors for them, being, 
in that respect, the same also, did naturally require the 
same authority and power for it. And that those holy 
Apostles did actually exercise such a power, I proved by 
the collateral authority of Clemens Romanus, who, in 
so many words, assures us, that they ordained both Bish- 
ops and Deacons so. 

3d. I shewed, from the evidence of the sacred text 
itself, that those adopted Apostles, St. Paul and St. Bar- 
nabas, did ordain Elders for the Churches, in the same 
manner, as to their sole and personal act in it; referring 
the reader to many unexceptionable authorities, for that 
exposition of the holy penmen's words. 

4th, That the same St. Paul conveyed the like power 
to Timothy and Titus, requiring no concurrence of a 
popular election with them, either in his commission or 
instructions given to them; but, on the contrary, left 
cautions with them to beware of trusting too much to 
any such elections. 

And, Lastly, I considered at large that single instruc- 
tion so often strained to prove a popular election by, viz. 
That the Bishops or Deacons must be first proved, and 
found to be blameless; and shewed, that neither in the 
sense of the Apostle himself, nor from the nature of the 
thing, or in the more impartial sense and judgment of the 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, <fcC 115 

learned Enquirer himself, any such popular claim or title 
could be implied in it. 

From these particulars, I conceive the first part, or 
member, of the general distinction I proposed, to be made 
good, viz. that the holy Scriptures set forth to us a divine 
right, authority, and power, of ordaining Elders in the 
Church, absolutely and entirely conveyed, from the 
fountain of all power in it, to the single persons of the 
first spiritual rulers of it, without any previous or con- 
current election of the people in the case; and that it 
was so executed and conveyed down to others also. 

To proceed to the other part of that distinction then: 
What account do we find of this matter in the records of 
primitive antiquity nearest approaching to the first age 
of the Church? And here I might produce variety of 
instances, wherein neither election, nor so much as a 
convention of the people, was to be found, or heard of, 
at the consecration of many of those primitive Bishops 
within that period of time. Clemens Romanus constitutes 
Euaristus his successor by his own assignment, and a 
kind of surrender, as it were, before his death; for so * 
Eusebius' words, here noted in the margin, do plainly 
imply. Phsedimus, Bishop of Amasea, had no other 
hand but that of Heaven and his own, in making the re- 
nowned Gregory Bishop of Neocsesarea, as the whole 
circumstances of that affair, related by the learned f Dr. 
Cave, from Greg. Nyssen, do sufficiently shew. But, 
not to amuse ourselves with enquiring after particular 
cases, what sense can we make of that particular Canon 
of the Church, which taxes the people of a Diocese with 

* KX77//775 Euapij'a) irapaSus rr}V Xurspyiav avaXvu tov &iav. Euseb. Eccl. 

Hist. 1. 3, c. 34. 

\ See Dr. Cave's Life of Greg, Thaumat. k 6. p. 271. 



116 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

great iniquity, who would not receive a Bishop ordained 
for them, and sent to preside over them? Nay, suspended 
the Clergy of that city, for not instructing such an insolent 
people any better; which are the express words of the 36th 
Apostolical * Canon? What sense, I say, can we make 
of so ancient a Canon as this, if it were not familiarly in 
use in those primitive times, to ordain a Bishop for a va- 
cant See without the people having any concern in it? and 
they who can believe that Canon to be of later date than 
the third century, at the most, after all the evidence 
which the learned antiquarians have given to the contra- 
ry, will hardly be brought to reason I am afraid. And 
yet we need" not insist on this neither; for the constant 
and settled custom of the Church of Alexandria is so 
pregnant an instance in this case, as supercedes all far. 
ther enquiry in the matter. 

That the twelve Presbyters alone chose their Bishop 
there to the middle of the third century, at least, is evi- 
dent enough from St. Jerome's account of it, though, in 
other respects, the same passage is too often misapplied. 
But his account is this : f At Alexandria, says he, from 
Mark the Evangelist to Hersxlas and Dionysius' time, 
(who were the 13th and 14th Bishops in succession there) 
the Presbyters always nominated one their Bishop, chosen 
from among themselves, and placed in a higher station. — 
Add to this evidence the same account given us, only 
more fully and particularly still, by Severus, who wrote 

*Ei x u 9°l° vr i^ il< > miGKOiros — fxr] o£%0?7, y ~apa tyjv iav)ayv^r\v, aWairapa 
rrjv T8 \au jtio%0?7/)tai/, av'Jog jum7w ittickottos^ b Se irXrjpos ttjs koXu&s a(f>opi£esQ<a 
on Town* Xaa avvxo'Jaic'lu iraiS&v'JaL sk lyzvovlo. Can, Apostol. 36. 

^-Nara et Alexandria a Marco Evangelista usq; ad Hera clam et 
Dlonysium episcopos, presbyteii semper unum ex §e electuni, in excel- 
siori giadu collocatum, episcopum nominabant. Hieron* Ep. ad- Eua&r. 
Edit. Erasm. Basil. 1516. Tom. 3. Fol. 150. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 117 

'the Lives of the Alexandrian Patriarchs, and by the 
Arabian and Egyptian annalists of that Church, as * 
Abraham Ecchellensis has recorded them for us; and we 
shall find it was not only a stated custom in that primitive 
Church for the Presbyters alone thus to choose their 
Bishop, but that it was a fundamental constitution there, 
and of St. Mark's own appointment. What must we 
think then? Could the people have a general right, or 
charter of election granted them, either from Christ or 
his Apostles, and this holy Evangelist know nothing of 
it? Or, if he had known it, would he have established 
a standing rule, in that eminent Church of his own found- 
ing, so directly contrary to it? 

But, not to insist on these approved records of the 
Church neither, though the testimony they bear is strong 
and plain enough, I shall willingly go along with the En- 
quiry before me, as far as fact and truth will give me leave. 

I dispute not, therefore, that very early custom cf pro- 
vincial Bishops repairing to o vacant See, and in the 
presence of the people settling the election of the intended 
Bishop, and ordaining him there, in most provinces I 
mean, though not in all,* which is as far as f his quota- 
tions require. 

But, to bring the question to a short issue, what was 
the part or office of the people in those public ordina- 
tions? The Enquiry, treating of the Presbyter's exami- 
nation for his holy orders, which, in his sense, is the 
making of him Bishop too, as to the orders that he takes, 
allows of + testimony and attestation only of the people in 

• See &brah. Ecchellens. de Eccl. Alex, originib. Romae, 1661. 4to. 
cap. 6. p. 82, 83, 84. and? . 103 to 107, 
t Fere pvovincias universas. Enq. p. 48. 
J See Enquiry, p. 88. 

u 

t 



118 AN OKXGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

the case; but when he comes to be made a Bishop indeed, 
in the true and universal sense of the Catholic Church, 
then the people's testimony improves itself into a claim of 
power sufficient to elect him Bishop, if they please, or to 
depose him afterwards, if they think he proves unfit for it. 

Now, there are two short questions to be observed in 
this case. 

1st, Whether the primitive Church itself, who so com- 
monly ordained in the presence of the people, acknow- 
ledged any such power in them, or no? 

2d, From whence was this power given, if such an one 
there was, and by what authority was it claimed? 

To prove that the primitive Church did acknowledge 
such a power, the Enquiry produces two instances. 1st, 
That of an * African synod, related by St. Cyprian, [Ep. 
68. § 6. or in the Oxon. ed. Ep. 67.] and translates it 
thus: The neighboring Bishops of the province, says he, 
•met together at the Church of a vacant See, and chose a 
Bishop in the presence of the people, who knew his Ufa 
and conversation before: which custom was observed m 
the electing q/Sabinus, Bishop of Emerita in Spain, who 
was ordained to that dignity by the svjfrage of all the 
brethren, and of all the Bishops there present, j" 

In this account of the case, here are two parts; 1st, 
What the general custom was; and 2d, That the partic- 
ular ordination of Sabinus was in all points conformable 

* Apud nos et fere per provincias universas lenetur, ut ad ordina- 
tioues rite celebrandas, ad earn plebem, cui propositus ordinatur, 
episcopi ejusdsrn pjovincise proximi quiq; eonveniant, et episcopus 
deligatur, plebe prsesente, qua} singulorum vitam plenissime novit, et 
imiuscujusq ; actum cie ejus conversatione perspexit: Quod factum 
videmus in Sabini oi c'matione, ut de universae fraiemhatis suffragio, ei 
de episcoporum judicio episcopalus ei deferrctur. Cypr, Ep. G8, aut. 
Edit. Oxon. 

f See Enquiry, p. 48. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 119 

to it. Of the general custom, it is affirmed, in our au- 
thor's own translation, that the neighboring Bishops met 
together at the Church of a vacant See, and chose a 
Bishop. Here is as plain a proof, I think, of the neigh- 
boring Bishops choosing the person, as words can make 
it. What then is said of the people? Only this, that it 
was in their presence, who knew his life and conversation 
before. If any man can see a popular election here, he 
must be quicker sighted than I can ever hope to be. — 
That their knowledge of his life and conversation before, 
should qualify them to give testimony of his moral conduct 
and behavior amongst them, and so encourage or discour- 
age the Bishops in making or confirming their elections, 
is a natural and genuine inference from that expression; 
and if we will allow St. Cyprian to make his references 
and similitudes apposite and agreeable to the subject he 
applies them to, we must conclude it was his own mean- 
ing too: For upon this very argument, and in the same 
page, he refers to God's instructions to Moses, to bring 
forth Aaron, with Eleazar his son, and place them before 
the congregation, in order to consecrate the son his fa- 
ther's successor; and I presume, no man infers from 
hence, that the congregation of Israel chose or voted 
Eleazar to the high-priesthood, because it was appointed' 
to be done in their presence; and why this reference, 
then, to illustrate Christian ordinations by, if they were 
so very different in that particular circumstance for 
which alone they were produced? which was, to shew that 
the judgment and testimony about them both, should be 
as public as it well could be; for that is the very reason* 

* Ut sacerdos, plebe pracesente, sub omnium oculis deligatur, et dig- 
nus atq; idoneus publico judicio ac testimonio comprobetur, sicut in 
Numeris Dominus Moysi piascepit. Cypr. Ep.. 68. aut Edit* Qxoi\ 
Ep, 67. 



120 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

given by St. Cyprian, for quoting the sacred text, and 
applying it to the argument he had in hand. 

For any thing that appears in this quotation, the gene- 
ral custom of the Church made the election of the person 
to be the Bishop's part, and left the presence and testimo* 
ny of the people only to be theirs; and doubtless in Sa- 
binus' case it could be no otherwise, for it is introduced 
here with this attestation to it, that this custom of the Church 
was accordingly observed in the ordination of Sabinus. 
Where lies the evidence then, that the people chose there, 
though the general custom is declared in this quotation, 
not to be so? Not in St. Cyprian's affirming it, I am 
sure, in such plain terms, as he affirmed before that the 
provincial Bishops met and chose too; but it wholly lies 
in a positive construction of a dubious and mistaken word 
in this quotation, and the Enquirer's ingenuity in joining 
two different terms, in one and the same sense, in his 
translation, which the accurate St. Cyprian had careful- 
ly distinguished himself. For the holy father's words, 
to translate them right, are these; That the Bishoprick 
was conferred upon Sabinus, by the suffrage of all the 
brethren, and by the judgment of the Bishops there; so that 
judgment and suffrage are plainly distinguished, we see, 
by St. Cyprian; th3 former attributed to the Bishops 
alone, and the latter to all the brethren; whereas the En- 
quirer was pleased to unite them in his translation, and 
says that Sabinus was advanced to that dignity by the suf- 
frage of all the brethren, and of all the Bishops there pre. 
sent. So that suffrage being made the same with a judi- 
cial act, by this ingenious union of them, insensibly con-, 
veyed an equal share at least, of right and power to the 
people in this election, with that of the Bishops them- 
selves; and that purely, so far as any man can see, be- 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C* 121 

cause the word suffrage was taken of course to signify no 
less; which I desire the reader more particularly to take 
notice of, because a very great stress of this ingenious 
author's arguments for popular election, and that which 
innocently influenced, it is possible, his own judgment in 
it too, seems to lie in a mistaken construction of this single 
word, in the writings of St. Cyprian. 

I must be forced, upon this occasion, therefore, to 
spend a little time in clearing up the holy Martyr's notion 
of it, which I shall do as briefly as I can. 

And were there no other instance in all the venerable 
monuments we have of his excellent works, to prove that 
suffrage, in his ordinary use of the word, implied no right 
or power at all, in them that gave it; or conveyed any 
title, or part of title, to the person they gave their suf- 
frages for; this single passage before us would go a 
great way to persuade an unprejudiced man that it was 
so. For to find it distinguished, as it is here, from- the 
judicial part of the whole proceedings, and the decisive 
act, which judgment expressly is, attributed afterwards 
unto others, who were fewer in number too, does natural- 
ly enough imply, that there was no actual power, but 
purely either precedent testimony or a subsequent appro- 
bation in the suffrages of the people; else their very num- 
ber would have made them Judges, rather than the Bish- 
ops themselves; and it makes not a little to the same 
purpose, that those very words were" carefully distin- 
guished also, in the account of Eleazar's public conse- 
cration, just before, where we are sure they must be 
taken so. 

But to shew how familiar this notion of the word is, in 
the writings of that primitive father; let these farther 
instances, out of many more, which might be produced. _ 
11* 



122 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

be added to the former. In his Tract Be Zelo et Livore, 
*speaking of the people's transport of joy and satisfac- 
tion at David's slaying of Goliah; he expresses it thus, 
They broke forth, says he, into commendation of David, 
with suffrage of applause. What can this suffrage of 
'applause signify, but plainly a testimony of the people's 
highest approbation of the thing done; not expressed by 
way of votes, to be sure, it would be absurd enough to 
imagine that, but by public acclamations of them all, as 
infinitely pleased with what the holy champion had done; 
and this St. Cyprian thought properly expressed, by 
calling it, the suffrage of the people. 

Again, in his Treatise Be Ymdtate Jdolarum, speaking 
of the Jews earnestly urging Pilate to crucify our blessed 
Lord, f they delivered him up, says he, to Pontius Pilate, 
requesting of him by force, and importunate suffrages, 
that he should be crucified; and what meant these impor- 
tunate suffrages more, than to shew their wicked inclina- 
tions, desire, and highest approbation of the thing, if 
Pilate should pass such a bloody sentence upon him? for 
they declared themselves, they had no power, in the act 
of putting any man to death, Jo. xviii. 31. Yet this the 
accurate holy father again, in his language, calls the 
suffrage of the Jev:s. 

JL> o J 

One instance more I shall name, because it contains in 
it his own explication of the word, and plainly shews, that, 
by suffrage, he meant the same thing as he did by public 
testimony; and nothing more. In his 68th Epistle, he 

* Populus admirans in laudes David prsedicationis suffragio prosiliit. 
Cypr. de Zelo et Liv, p. 223. Oxon. Ed. 

1 Magistri eorum Pontio Pilato tradiderunt cruenrn ejus, et mortem 
suffrages violentis et pertinacious flagitantes* Gypr.de Vaoit. Idol, p. 
16. Ed. Oxon. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 123 

says of Cornelius' ordination, * that it was hy the cufrage 
of the Clergy and the people; and of the same ordination, 
in another place, he says, it was f hy the testim.ony of 
almost all the Clergy, and by the svffrage of the people 
that were there. Now if the testimony of the Clergy in 
the latter clause be not the same with their svffrage in 
the former, then it was something less than so; and con- 
sequently the Clergy's personal part and interest in elec- 
tions falls short of the common people's, to whom a 
suffrage is imputed in the same clause; which, I presume 
is not intended neither. But if the terms be allowed to 
be equivalent, the case is plain, the holy father appears 
consistent with himself; and in no other sense, I appre- 
hend, it can be so. 

These few instances, I think, may shew, that to take 
the word suffrage in the sense of solemn testimony, good- 
liking, approbation, or the like, in the works of St. Cy- 
prian, is an authentic and warrantable interpretation of 
it, as being directly suitable to his own manifest and 
familiar notion of the word; and therefore I leave the 
reader to judge, whether the Enquirer's promiscuous 
joining of it with the word judgment in the quotation 
now before us, as if they were synonymous terms, and 
laying the whole stress of the quotation upon it, when 
the holy father himself had cautiously distinguished them 
in both places, where occasion was offered him to do so, 
does not seem, at least, a mistaken apprehension of that 
great author's sense; and by that means strains the 
whole quotation, to prove a popular election, when, by 
what has been offered, we may clearly see, there is no 
such evidence to be found in either part of it. 

* De cleri et plebis suffragio. Cypr. Ep. 63. 

f De clericorum poene omnium testimonio, et de plebis, quss tunc 
affuit, suflragio. Ep. 55. p. 104. Edit. Oxon. 



124 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

* The other authority brought to prove the same thing, 
is a passage in St. Clement's first epistle to the Corin- 
thians, where our learned author observes; f that apos- 
tles and apostolic preachers ordained Bishops and deacons 
with the consent of the whole Church; that is, by their 
votes given for the candidate to be ordained in the man* 
ner of a regular election; for so the subject he applies it 
to, obliges us to understand it. Now this evidence so 
far agrees with the former, that the whole force of it 
lies in the signification of a single word again, and will 
not want many, I hope, to shew the invalidity of it. St. 
Clement's word for consenting here, is [owivhoKnaamis] 
and if any word in the Greek tongue could aptly render 
St. Cyprian's sense of suffrages in the notion I have just 
now given of it, I should think it might be this. But let 
the language of the inspired penmen determine it for us, 
RbfoKiw is of near affinity to it, to be sure, and this we of. 
ten meet with in Holy Writ. God's complacency in his 
own Son is expressed by that word in three of the evan- 
gelists; ^ this is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 
§ St, Paul uses it for taking pleasure in infirmities, in 
reproaches, in necessities; and for the wicked's being 
pleased in unrighteousness; (2 Thes. ii. 12.) And other 
places in Holy Writ might be produced to the same pur- 
pose, which the learned || commentators expound by 
rejoicing, resting highly satisfied , and acquiescing in them. 
And how can the right of election be grounded on such a 
term as this? f St. Luke expresses Saul's consent to the 

* See Enquiry, p. 49. 

t Kalas-aOevJas vtto £K£iva)v*icai fx&^a^v virzp i'J&pwv iWoyipiav av&ptav, 
cvvevSoKrjaaarjg rr\<; eKK^rjaiag iraar/s. . Clem. Rom. Ep . ad Corinth, p, 57. 

J Ev w evSoKrica* Matt, ii I. 17. Mark. i. 2, Luk. iii. 22. 

§ IStvSoKU) iv aadivsiais, &c. 2. xii. 10. 

\\ l&vSoKr}aav']&s zv aSina tut £$-i %«tpw, evfypaivofxai, \ai)a ev9v[/ias hxo^au - 
The )dor. in loc, EjcOncav aspivug tt] aSiKta . TheophyJ. in loc. 

1T ?.av\o$ Si tjv (jvvevSok&v r?j avaipzvu avru . Act* viii. I 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 125 

death of St. Stephen, indeed, by the very same word 
which St. Clement used here. But if that tragical act 
was all over rage, and riot, and lawless violence of a 
barbarous and incensed multitude, as the Holy penman's 
relation of it does sufficiently shew, then Saul's consen- 
ting to such an act as that, can have no other sense, I 
think, so fairly put upon it, as that which we have found 
to be in all the foregoing particulars upon this head; that 
is, he highly approved the thing, had a thorough satis- 
faction in it, and his heart went along with theirs, who 
were principal actors in it. So that the sense of St. 
Clement's word, even in the language of holy scripture 
itself, does in no wise warrant such an inference from it 
as can establish a popular election in the least. 

To strengthen these two authorities, the Enquiry offers 
three or four examples of matter of fact, where Bishops 
were actually chosen by the people; and therefore the 
primitive Church did own such a power in them. I will 
propose them fairly as they are, and consider them as 
briefly as I can. 

His first example is that of Alexander, Bishop of Je- 
rusalem, * chosen there, says he, by the compulsion or 
choice of the members of that Church. So he translates 
the quotation for us; which, in plain English, is thus: f 
That the brethren would not suffer Alexander to return 
home. The matter of fact was this; Alexander was a 
Bishop in Cappadocia long before that "time, but came to 
Jerusalem out of devotion to pray there, and visit the 
country. Here, by one Divine vision to himself, and 
another to the people of Jerusalem, God was pleased to 
signify, that he should stay amongst them, and be an 

* See Enquiry, p. 46. 

+ AS'cXfoL vket' oiKaSi avTO) Tm\ivo$iiv ZTnlpzirvai. Euseb. 1. 6, C 11 . 



126 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

assistant Bishop lo the superannuated Narcissus, who 
was now 116 years old; upon which vissions, with an au- 
dible voice from Heaven to confirm them, the people 
would not suffer him to return home again. This is the 
first example of the people's choosing a Bishop for them- 
selves. I shall join the second to it, because of the resem- 
blance they have to one another. It is that of* Fabian, 
us's promotion to the Bishopric of Rome. This looks a 
little fairer to the purpose indeed; for the people were 
met in consultation about nominating a person whom 
they liked: And whilst they were thus together, a dove 
miraculously lights upon Fabianus' head, in the same 
manner as the Holy Ghost formerly descended on our 
blessed Saviour; at which Divine vision, in so miracu- 
lous a manner, the people, as it were by inspiration, for 
so the historian's express words are, f cry out with one 
heart and one mind, that Fabianus was worthy of the 
Bishopric; and straitway they hastily set him on the- 
throne. 

These ara the two leading instances or examples of a 
popular election in the primitive Church; and to speak 
my thoughts freely of them, they incline me much more 
to admire, than to reply. To admire, I say, that so im- 
portant a right and privilege of all Christian congrega- 
tions in the world, as that of electing their own Bishops 
surely would be, should be supported in the very foun- 
dation of it, by two such singular examples as these. 

Yet because St. Cyprian furnishes me with a short an- 
swer to all extraordinary occasions of this nature, I shall 
leave it with the reader, and hope it may excuse a farther 

* SeeEuseb. 1 . 6. c. 29. Hist. Eccl. 

t Qvzcp \)<p ivos Trvivfxa'Jos 9em Ktvrjdiv'Ja ojxggs . lb. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 127 

reply. * We must not wait for the testimony of men, says 
that excellent Father, wlxere the testimony of God is given 
in before. By this maxim, that holy Martyr himself 
practised, when he ordained the eminent confessor Aure- 
lius, a deacon of his Church, without the people's char- 
acter or testimony of him; which, I freely own, he ordina- 
rily used to inform himself by. And if the constancy of 
Aurelius, under his several trials and persecutions, de- 
served the name of God's testimony for him; for that 
was all in the case, surely the heavenly voice and visions, 
in each of the foregoing instances, both of Alexander 
and Fabianus too, may well be taken for no less; and 
consequently the human suffrages, whether of Laity or 
©lergy, in those elections, were but very indifferent pre- 
cedents to shew how far they might go. 

There are two examples more proposed to us; 1st, that 
of Cornelius, the successor of Fabianus at Rome; and 
lastly, that of St. Cyprian himself at Carthage. But 
forasmuch as all the force of both of them f lies in that 
construction of the word suffrage, again, and in the lan- 
guage of that holy father too, which we have seen alrea- 
dy, can warrant no consequence from it, I conceive the 
answer to them both to be given there. It is true indeed, 
Pontius the deacon calls it, t the favour of the people, in 
St. Cyprian's case; (if that would mend the matter) and 
our Enquirer has not failed to quote it here. But let 
Pontius be his own commentator, who in the same page 
calls the people's part in it, § their earnest spiritual desir* 

* JNon expcctan Ja sunt t^stimonia hun&ma, cum prsecedunt divina 
raffragia. ( ypr. Ep . 38. Edit. Oxon . 
t See Enquiry, p. 47. 
% Pont, in Vit. Cypr v p. 3. Edit, Oxon. 
i Plebs spirituali desiderio concupiscens — Episcopum, &e. 



128 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

to have him for their Bishop; which shews, their favour 
had inclination strong enough in it, but little of authority 
in the case. 

Having considered, then, both authorities and exam- 
ples, here offered us, to clear the first question by, viz: 
whether the primitive Church, which so commonly or- 
dained in the presence of the people, acknowledged any 
such electing power in them, or no? 1 determine nothing 
for others, any farther than the evidence of fact and rea- 
son, I have laid before them, shall incline them to; 
though I confess, I think it clear, beyond all dispute, that 
the first and nearest ages to that of the Apostle's owned 
no such right or power to belong to them, whatever the 
encroachments of the people, upon account of their testi- 
monies so prudently asked in the case, or the condescen- 
sion of some provincial synods, might bring it to at last. 

Yet, to go as far with this hypothesis, as I can; I pro- 
ceed to the second question, which was this: From 
whence was this power given, supposing such a power 
there was, and by what authority was it claimed? 

The foregoing particulars will make the answer short. 
We have fouud it neither practised by our blessed Lord 
himself, nor given in commission to his principal Apos- 
tles. We have found those principal Apostles manifestly 
ordained both Bishops and Deacons, in such a manner, 
as was inconsistent with it. We have seen, that the 
Apostles next in order to them, and adopted into their 
college, ordained Elders for the Churches, by their own 
personal authority and choice alone; and farther, that 
St. Paul himself, being one of them, conveyed the like 
ordaining power to ether supreme Pastors placed by him- 
self over the respective Churches he committed to theft 
care, neither in commission or instructions enjoining or 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 129 

advising them to make use of such a popular election, but 
rather indeed cautioning them to be very wary in that 
matter. And lastly, we have seen that many ordinations 
in the ages following, and particularly in the great 
Church of Alexandria, at least for near three hundred 
years together, were performed without any such elec- 
tion at all; no one of which particulars, had it been of 
Divine or Apostolical institution, could tolerably be ac- 
counted for. 

Whence then, to speak the most of it, could such a 
right or power arise, but from the free consent and pru- 
dential Laws or Canons of ancient Bishops in some pro- 
vincial synods amongst themselves? For as for general 
councils in the three first centuries, I am clearly of the 
* Enquirer's mind, there was none such within that peri, 
od of time. And since we are agreed so far, that none 
but provincial Synods were held within those early ages 
of the Church; I hope, I may affirm with him also, f that 
their decrees were binding and obligatory to those particu- 
lar Churches only, whose representatives they were : and as 
a consequence of that, whatever they decreed for discip- 
line or order within their own precincts or jurisdiction, 
which had not the stamp of divine institution or command 
upon it, they had also power to disannul or repeal; and 
the power of all provinces in this respect was the same. 

From whence this plain truth, I think, may naturally 
be inferred, that whatsoever province in the Catholic 
Church had never once consented to such a Canon of 
discipline amongst themselves, as this of popular election 
is; or had they once decreed it, yet directly or virtually 
had by their own Canons or Constitutions repealed or 

* See Enquiry, p. 141. 
t See Enquiry, p . 146. 
12 



130 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

disannulled it again. The Christian Laity within the 
district or jurisdiction of any such province, could have 
no warrantable right or charter whatsoever, to claim 
such an electing power in any of the ordinations there. 
For a claim of power, right, or privilege within the Chris- 
tian Church; without a warrantable grant from that head 
or fountain of power, whether it be originally Divine, or 
purely Ecclesiastical, from whence alone it can proceed, 
approaches near to the very definition of usurpation itself. 
In the mean time, I freely own, that all which the 
primitive Church declares to be their reason for ordain- 
ing Bishops in the presence and cognizance of the people, 
was not only warrantable, but wise, and worthy of the 
imitation of all succeeding ages of the Church; for their 
reasons were manifestly these, * that the crimes of ill men 
mz%klbe brought to light, and the merits of good men openly 
proclaimed, And thus far, I believe, there could be little 
objection made against the constitution or practice of 
almost any Christian Churches in this very age, and par- 
ticularly against the established Church of England, 
where ordinations are enjoined to be celebrated in f a 
public manner, and the congregation invited to make 
what objections they can; and at every confirmation of 
a Bishop elect, £ citations are appointed to be issued out, 

* Ut plebe prsesente, vel detegantur malorurn crimina, vel honorum 
menta prcedicentur. Cypr.'Ep. 67. p. 172. Edit. Oxon. 

\ In some Sunday, or holiday, in the face of the Church. See Rubr. 
before Priests' Orders, and Pref. to Eng. Ordinal. $ ult. The Bishop 
shall say unto the people, thus: Brethren, if there be any of you who 
knoweth any impediment, or notable crime, &c. let him come forth in 
the name of God, and shew what it is. See the office for ordaining 
Deacons and Priests, p. 1. 

\ See Godolph. Repertor. Ganon. Cap. 3. p. 26. and Clark's Prnxfct 
in Cur. Eccles. TituU 329. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 131 

proclamations six times made, to summon all opposers 
before the consecration be allowed. And in this sense 
only it is, that St. Cyprian so solemnly declared the an- 
cient custom, then in use amongst them, * of repairing to 
a vacant See for ordaining a new Bishop there, to be of 
Divine tradition, and Apostolical observation; which is so 
mightily insisted upon, to prove an indispensable obliga* 
tion to popular elections; for that he grounded all his 
divine tradition upon God's instructions to Moses only, 
for consecrating Eleazar before all the congregation, is 
manifestly clear from the whole context of the place; and 
the Apostles themselves, observing those very Magisteria 
Divina, as his words are, that is, those very directions 
again, given unto Moses, when they ordained afterwards; 
he therefore calls it also, Apostolical observation. Thus 
the direct connection of those two paragraphs in St. Cy- 
prian, obliges us to understand his words; and how little 
those directions countenance a popular election, the ex- 
ample of the fact itself does sufficiently teach us, as we 
observed before; and indeed St. Cyprian, closing up all 
with that very application of it to the Christian practice 
of his own times, namely, f that a Bishop should be chosen:. 
in the presence of the people, who knew their life and con-. 
versation, and saying no more, would convince any im« 
partial man, that he all along meant no more by it.. 

It is true, he instances the cases of St. Matthias* and 
the seven Deacons; where the people were not present 
only, say the common advocates for the Congregational, 
cause, but in all appearance absolutely chose, the persons, 
too. 

* Propter quod diligeater de traditione Diviaa, et Apostolica ob- 
servation tenendum est, &c. Cypr . Ep, 67. Edit. Oxon. p. 172. 

t Ut episcopus deligatur, plebe praessnte, qua? singitiormn vitam 
plenissime novit, &c. Ep. 67, 



132 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

I shall consider these two plausible examples, so much 
triumphed in by many, with all the fairness and brevity 
that I can, and hasten to dismiss the argument. 

As to that of St. Matthias, it seems a very unaccount- 
able precedent, for a standing practice in the Church, in 
whatsoever manner it was done; since, properly speak- 
ing, the foundation of the Christian Church, as it is a 
spiritual corporation or society of believers, was not then 
laid, because the Holy Ghost was not yet given, who was 
to endue the very master-builders themselves with all 
that power and wisdom from above, by which they were 
to found and govern the Church of God upon earth. The 
eleven there present were Apostles elect, by the infallible 
nomination indeed of their Lord and Master : But their 
commission was not yet sealed, nor were they furnished 
with those credentials and instructions, which the spirit 
was to give them afterwards; insomuch as they presumed 
not to act in that extraordinary ordination by their own 
personal judgment, as at other times, but referred the 
determination to God alone, casting lots, and appealing 
to God by prayer for it. 

Which makes it stranger still, as to the case at present 
before us, that the votes and suffrages of the people should 
be sought for, in a case where the Apostles themselves 
dare so little interpose, and where God himself made 
choice of his own Apostle. 

But it will be said perhaps, that the brethren then 
present nominated, at least, or proposed the two candi- 
dates; if so, it must be granted still, that their human 
suffrages could have neither authority, direction, or any 
kind of influence upo.a a divine election, which gains but 
little to the purpose it is chiefly urged for. But after all, 
the very nomination of the persons in this case of St. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 133 

Matthias, will very hardly, if it can at all, be proved to 
have been the brethren or congregation's part, by any 
thing we meet with in St. Peter's whole discourse. — 
There were about a hundred and twenty persons present, 
it is sure, and what St. Peter spake, was in the audience 
of them all; but to whom he immediately addressed his 
discourse, and upon them imposed the obligation of pro- 
viding a successor in the room of Judas, is another ques- 
tion, which the sense and substance of the speech itself 
can best resolve for us. 

Now. two expressions in it afford no small light to this 
purpose. 

1st, In speaking of Judas, who was fallen from his 
Apostleship, St. Peter's words are these: He was num- 
bered ivith us, and had obtained a part of this ministry, 
that is, of the Apostolic Ministry, no doubt. Was Judas 
thus numbered then with all the brethren there present, 
as partaker with them of that Apostolic function? or with 
.-• t. Peter only, and the other ten Apostles, in the midst 
of whom he then spake? Surely this latter sense alone is 
the utmost the words can bear, when he says, he was 
numbered with us; and consequently they were his Apos- 
tolic brethren only, to whom he addressed them. 

2d, In the directions he gives, from whence the suc- 
cessor of Judas should be chosen, his expression is this: 
Wherefore, of these men, says he, that have accompanied 
with us, &c. Of these men! Why not of some amongst 
yourselves? or some words equivalent to that? if the per- 
sons to be elected were not only to be chosen/rom among 
them, but themselves io be the electors also. That seems 
the direct expression for recommending the election to 
the brethren, and enjoining them to elect one from among 
themselves too : Whereas the other, which St. Peter uses 
12* 



134 AN ORIG'INAB DRAUGHT OF 

is as plainly an address to some other electors there pre- 
sent, to choose out of those very brethren before them, 
pointing at them, as it were, by that natural expression; 
out of these persons that have accompanied with us, &c. 

We need no more, I think, though more remarks 
might be made, to prove, that the Apostles there present 
were the peculiar persons St. Peter addressed his speech 
to; and I presume it will not be disputed then, but that 
those words, at ver. 23, and they appointed two, did refer 
to them likewise, and to them only: So that the people had 
no part so much as in the nomination of the persons to be 
proposed as candidates for that divine election. 

I am sensible, the title of St. Peter's address in these 
words of our translation, men and brethren, has not a 
little contributed to the contrary exposition of the whole 
discourse. But let it be considered, that the particle and 
is not in the original text, and owned by our translators 
not to be so, by the different letter it is printed in; and 
therefore the holy penman's language denotes no more, 
than 'if St. Peter had said, my brethren only; and that the 
whole congregation were so in a genera! sense, is not to 
be disputed; but that the Apostles there present were in 
a singular and more eminent sense St. Peter's brethren, 
as united in the Apostolic college with, him, cannot be 
denied neither. And therefore, since the subject of the 
discourse appropriates the speech peculiarly to them, 
there is greater reason that that evidence should explain 
the meaning of an indefinite term in the title, than that 
the equivocal sense alone, against the tenor of the whole 
discourse, should determine for us otherwise. And per-, 
haps the *Avfy«ufoA?o), on which the contrary is grounded; 
does rather add an emphasis in the title, to denote the 
sense we take it in; for I should think it no exceptionable 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 135 

translation of it, were it rendered thus: Ye men that are 
peculiarly my brethren; which shews a kind of emphatical 
distinction of some there present from all the rest. Upon 
the whole matter, I think we might very well subscribe 
to the learned Grotius' conclusion in this case: * It is a 
wonder to me, says he, how some men have persuaded them- 
selves, that Matthias was chosen by the people to his Apos- 
tolic charge; for in St. Luke I find no footstep of it. 

As to the case of the seven Deacons, they were left to 
the enquiry, choice, and nomination of the brethren, 
there is no doubt of it; but in what particular respect, 
with what special limitations, and how far it may be made 
a precedent for the people's choosing their own Bishops 
and Pastors in the Church, a very short view of the mat- 
ter of fact may inform us. For, 

1st, Whatever offices in the Church the Apostles' im- 
position of hands might entitle those Deacons to, it is 
plain, their referring the nomination of them to the breth- 
ren was upon that single score of finding out persons they 
could entrust with the contributions of the Church, for 
the daily ministrations, and for the serving of tables; for 
that was the only thing in open agitation, and the holy 
Apostles assigned that special part to them; Look you out 
men, &c. whom we may appoint over this business. 

2d, The Apostles leave not the whole matter to their 
arbitrary and unlimited inclinations neither; but, amongst 
other qualifications, enjoin them to choose out persons 
full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, notof faith, surely, 
with the ordinary, inward , and sanctifying graces of the 
Holy Ghost only, for those were scarce discernible, with 

* Matthiam a populo ad Apostoli munus electum, miror quo argu- 
mento sibi quidam persuaserint, nam in Luca nullum ejus rei invenio 
vestigium. Grot, de Imp. Sum. potest, circa sacra. Cap. X. i 5. 






136 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

any certainty at least, by men; but they were to choose 
believers, as the event also shewed in the persons of St. 
Stephen and St. Philip, to be sure, who were endued with 
those miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost, which our 
blessed Saviour * promised should follow some that be- 
lieved, able to cast out devils, speak with new tongues, 
heal the sick, and the like; after the manner that f Cor- 
nelius' family and the disciples at Ephesus were filled 
with the Holy Ghost, as soon as they believed, or were 
baptized and confirmed upon it. And by this limitation 
the holy Apostles both secured their choice to be of God's 
approbation, by the power he endued them withal, and 
also provided persons fit for the greater offices in the 
Church, which by their holy orders they designed them 
for. 

So that these Deacons, so far as it was needful they 
should be faithful and trusty stewards of the contribu- 
tions and treasure of the Church, were ordered to be 
chosen and recommended by the members of it, whose 
stock and treasure they were to be entrusted withall; and 
for the like reason, no doubt of it, that another Apostle 
gives us on the like occasion; namely, if to avoid this, 
that no man should blame us (says St. Paul) in the abund- 
ance which is administered by us: For such sort of censures 
might the Apostles have been liable to, had they assumed 
the nomination of the persons to themselves; but by the 
course they took, they provided for honest things, not only 
in the sight of the Lord, but in the sight of men. And in 
the mean time, as to the qualifications required for those 
higher offices of evangelists, or preachers of the Gospel, to 

* Mark xvi. 17, 18. 

t Acts' x. 44,46, and Acts xix. 5, G. 

% 2Cor.viii.20. 21. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 137 

which the holy Apostles ordained those Deacons also, 
they had the divine testimony (as I observed but now) by 
the miraculous gifts bestowed upon them; and where that 
testimony was, St. Cyprian has taught us before, there 
needed not the testimony of men; and accordingly we 
find them not so much as proposed to the people under 
that capacity, when it was referred to the brethren to 
make choice of them. 

After these few observations upon the case, I leave it 
to the reader to determine, how far this singular and ex- 
traordinary precedent can go towards establishing a 
standing right and authority in all Christian congrega- 
tions, to choose their own Bishops and Pastors for them- 
selves: Leaving only the learned Beza's judgment with 
him too, who naming these two instances of* St. Matthias 
and the Deacons, when he was treating of the people's 
right of suffrages in ecclesiastical affairs, pronounces of 
them, that they are nothing to the purpose; and that the 
French Churches had sufficiently proved that against 
Morell, and his party, in their public synods. 

I have been long upon this argument; but it was chiefly, 
I may say, at the ingenious Enquirer's request; who, in 
his f preface, desired another sense might be given of the 
passages he had cited in his book. This I have endea- 
voured to do with as much sincerity, I think, as he so- 
lemnly professes he collected them at first: And, upon 
reflection on the whole, I am sorry I must repeat what I 
observed at the begining; that his singular manner of 

* Quod enim ex hlstoria electionis M*Uthiae et Diaconorum profertur, 

nihil ad rem facit Sicut adversus Morellium et alios deinceps 

ejusseetatores in synodis Gallicis est abunde probatum . Beza Tract,. 
Theol. Genev. 1582. Vol. 3.E P . 83 . p. 307, 

t SeePref.p. 7. 



138 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

mis-representing the primitive custom of electing and 
constituting a Bishop in a vacant See, appears to me a 
greater occasion of the unhappy controversies and divi- 
sions about it t than the primitive custom, truly stated, 
could ever have given to the most exceptious adversaries 
of the Church. 

I will mark out the particulars, though you have heard 
the most of them already, that we may view and judge 
at once. 

1st. He makes that to be a stated right of election in 
the people, which, by the genuine sense of his own quo- 
tations, as well as the apparent practice of the Church, 
we have seen amounts to no more, within his period of 
lime, than their public testimony, information, or cheer- 
ful approbation of the candidates^ which the provincial 
Bishops should think fit to ordain. 

2d. He has asserted that right of the people under 
such general terms of a primitive practice, as to lead the 
reader into an easy persuasion, that it must have been 
of original institution, either from Christ or his Apostles. 
Whereas the holy scriptures declare no such institution, 
nor set forth any such Divine charter for it; but assure us 
of the contrary, that the full power of ordaining Elders 
in the Church, was a personal charge entrusted wholly 
with the first founders and governors of the Apostolical 
Churches, and conveyed down so accordingly, without 
any such condition in it. 

3d. He has pronounced the ordaining, or constituting 
a Bishop, in a vacant See, to be absolutely invalid, with- 
out such a popular election in it; and by not defining 
wherein that validity, he means, does consist, has led the 
vulgar reader again into a ready opinion, that at no time, 
in no place, or province whatsoever, a Christian Bishop 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 139 

could be warrantably ordained, and set over any Church, 
without such an election of the people to authorize and 
qualify him for it. Whereas it may be seen, I think, by 
what has been proved upon this subject before, that the 
utmost validity any such sort of ordinations in any age 
of the Church has had, was grounded only on the pru- 
dential consent, or Canons, of such provincial Bishops as 
had agreed to exercise that ordaining power they were 
entirely entrusted with from above, in that particular 
manner, so long as times and persons should encourage 
them to let those Canons remain in force; and all this 
obliging no farther, than within their own districts or 
jurisdictions, and repealable at will, as having no Divine 
command for it. 

4th, and lastly. To finish all, he has advanced a sin- 
gular and unheard-of notion as I humbly conceive of 
two noted ecclesiastical terms in use amongst us, ordina- 
tion and instalment, making them equivocal * and conver- 
tible terms, and offers it for current truth, that ordaining 
and installing of a Bishop are one and the same thing, 
frankly translating the word, or dinar e, in the ancient 
writings of the fathers by this English word of, installing; 
and, which is stranger still, makes this installing act to be 
performed by imposition of Episcopal hands. Now if 
ecclesiastical records, either ancient or modern, could 
warrant this sort of language, I wish he had, at least, 
pointed to them. And yet suppose it could be so, which 
I confess is unimaginable to me, yet, to write to English 
readers in their own tongue, where Episcopal imposition 
of hands, and instalment of a Bishop, are so f apparent. 

* See Enquiry, p. 49. 

•f See Godolphin's Repert. Canon, p. 26. and 44. Edit. 3. Lond. 
1687. Where he shews us, that a Bishop is complete to all intents and 



140 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

ly different things, gives an unhappy suspicion of some 
secret notion to be insinuated into men, which was not to 
be spoken out. And so, indeed, the present case in hand 
did require; for if the sacred act of ordination by imposi- 
tion of Episcopal hands, imprinted any other character 
upon the person so consecrated or ordained, than the 
mere act of instalment does; in the English notion and 
practice of it, then these two unfortunate consequences, 
as our learned Author thinks them, would ensue upon it: 
1st. That the provincial Bishops' part in ancient ordina- 
tions was something more than their bare consent and 
approbation of the peoples' election, which is the chief 
part he allows them in the case. And, 2d- That their 
imposition of hands at this installing ordination might 
look like advancing of the candidate to a new order, 
which would lessen the peoples' part too much in making 
Bishops for themselves, and overturn the whole scheme 
of his next chapter; which is to prove, that the orders of 
Bishop and Presbyter in the Church are plainly one and 
the same. This shall be considered farther in its own 
place: In the mean ime, let any impartial man serious- 
ly consider what probability there is, that such represen- 
tations of antiquity as these should answer the pious ends 
of our ingenious Enquirer, and contribute to heal the un- 
happy divisions of the Church in the case and controversy 
now before us; since, as far as I am able to observe, these, 
and such like misunderstandings of the primitive prac- 
tice, are the sad occasions of their being so many, and 
so unhappy as they are. 

purposes, both as to temporalities and scnpturalities, after consacra- 
tion: But instalment in performed afterwards, in a manner riifiereot 
enough, by officers and ceremonies, very little a-kin to cho^e of conse- 
cration . 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 141 



CHAP. JV. 

To heal divisions in a Church, and displease none that 
make them, are two such works of charity as can scarce 
consist together. Yet, to carry this as far as it would 
go, the good Enquirer seems to aim at both; the former 
he solemnly professes in his preface, the latter as visibly 
appears in the performance itself. But with what suc- 
cess, and by what means he has done it, in a great mea- 
sure appears by what has gone before, and in this fourth 
chapter will be much clearer still. 

There are three or four parties, as he * tells us him- 
self, which he aimed to reconcile: He began with the 
independents' cause, and in order to make them and the 
rest agree, he has strained antiquity, you see, to make it 
speak their sense in the points of congregational Dioceses, 
and the popular right of choosing their own Bishops, the 
main matters they contend for, which no doubt of it, will 
offend none of them; but as to clearing up the truth in 
their case, and bringing them to a peaceful disposition 
for compromising matters, with such as differ from them; 
we may justly fear, by the palpable writhings for their 
sake, he has done little or nothing that can tend to that 
happy end. 

He now proceeds to bring the Presbyterian party, to a 
temper, by much the same way; that is. by allowing 
them fairly, as fast as he can, without regard to such as 
differ from them, the chief and fundamental point they 
insist upon, the equality of order in the Bishops, and the 
Presbyters; and to clear his way for that, he defines his 

* Enq,p. 1- 

13 



142 AIM original draught of 

Presbyters thus: A person in lwly orders, having thereby 
an inherent right to 'perform the whole office of a Bishop; 
but being possessed of no place or Parish, not actually dis- 
charging it without the permission and consent of the Bishop 
of a place or Parish. 

The difference, in the argument before us lies in the 
the former part of ihis definition; but our learned Author 
chose to prove the latter clause first, viz. that withoutthe 
Bishop's leave, a Presbyter could discharge no single part 
of his function; and for plainer evidence in that case, he 
reckoned up most of the particular acts relating to it, and 
beyond exception proved, that in every point it was so. 
Yet after all, he had so wonderful and singular a notion 
of this evident subjection of the Presbyters to their Bish- 
ops, in every ministerial act of theirs within their Bishop's 
jurisdiction, that he could affirm without scruple, in 
another place, that Presbyters ruled in those Churches 
ihey belonged to, and placed this ruling power of theirs 
amongst the several other premises, from whence an 
equality of order in Bishop and Presbyter was to be in- 
ferred at last; notwithstanding the palpable inequality he 
had so plainly owned, you see. in this particular before; 
which, to speak the most of it, might serve as well to 
prove, that kings and viceroys, or any deputed officers 
of theirs, are one and the same order of men in any civil 
state, because in some capacity, and in subordination to 
one another, they are all rulers within the same jurisdic- 
tion, though it is sufficiently known how vastly different 
their order and authority are, considered in themselves. 
But to come closer to the point. 

It is in the former part of our learned Author's defini- 
tion, that the question in debate is stated all at once, and 
with great assurance determined by him too. A Presby- 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 143 

ter, says he, u a person in holy orders, having thereby an 
inherent right to perform the whole office of a Bishop. 

Now, two things, directly contrary to the declared 
sense, as well as language, and practice of the primitive 
Church, are manifestly included in this single proposi- 
tion. 

1st. That the most solemn rites or holy offices which 
the primitive Church ever used for promoting any Pres- 
byter into the station of a Bishop, added nothing more 
to his former character and order, than a right and title 
only to exercise those powers, to the full, which were 
inherent in him before. And, 

2d. That all the clerical offices which any Bishop of 
the Church could perform, a Presbyter also, by virtue of 
his orders alone, had a right and power invested in him 
by the Bishop's leave only, to perform the same. 

Let this great controversy be tried then by the clear 
evidence of antiquity in these material points; and if in 
both, or either of them, the primitive Church be found 
notoriously to declare a contrary judgment in the case, 
and their practice as direct a contradiction to them too, 
it must follow of course, that a Presbyter in their times, 
and in their opinion of him, had not an inherent right by 
his orders to perform the whole office of a Bishop, as this 
learned Author affirms. 

To begin with the first of these, the sense and judgment 
of antiquity, concerning that holy rite, or solemn office 
of promoting a Presbyter to the station of a Bishop; 
wherein I observe, after the example, and by encourage- 
ment from the * Enquirer himself: 

1st. that the same word, which all antiquity uses for 
expressing the promotion of a layman to a Deacon, or a 

* See p. 10. 



144 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

Deacon to a Presbyter, they used also for the promotion 
of Presbyters into the station of a Bishop. It is ordina- 
tion of Bishops, as well as of Priests and Deacons, in the 
familiar language of the fathers. This our Enquirer 
owns, for he has quoted an authority from St. Cyprian 
for it, (page, 49.) and it is too obvious a matter to need 
any proofs. Hence I argue then, in * his own words,, 
if the same appellation of a thing be a good proof for the 
identity of its nature, then the right of consecrating a 
Bishop must confer a new order upon him, because the 
same name is familiarly used for it, as for the rite of or- 
daining a Presbyter, who undoubtedly had a new order 
conferred upon him by it. In this manner, our Enquirer 
proves his Bishops and Presbyters to be of one and the 
same order, from the identity of their names, (Enq. page 
67.) and those names sufficiently liable to distinct con- 
structions of them, as we shall see in due time and place? 
and though the argument would have had considerable 
weight in it, if he had proved the main thing necessary 
there; namely, that a Presbyter was ordinarily, or indeed 
ever called a Bishop, after the Apostolical age was a little 
over; yet for want of that, which he did not, and I am 
free to say he cannot prove, his argument, I think, can- 
not come up to the application I make of it here; since 
the word ordination, for making of Bishops, has been au- 
thentic in all ages of the Church, without any mark of 
distinction put upon it; and for fathers, councils, and his- 
torians generally to make use of it; where no order is 
given at all, not only puts a force upon the word itself, 
but is little less than an imposition upon all posterity also, 
by applying one and the same common term to solemn 

* See Enq. p. 67. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 145 

rites of the Church, of so near a resemblance to one 
another in all visible appearance, and yet so vastly differ- 
ent in the intention of the Church, as our Enquirer's sin- 
gular notion of it would make it to be; though I believe, 
he is the first who ever ventured to tell the world, that 
ordination in the making of a Bishop did, in our language, 
signify no more than mere instalment, as I observed be- 
fore, and now again will have the meaning of it to be a 
Presbyter's institution and induction into a cure; which 
to have proved as well as said, had been no more than 
was necessary to his cause. But, 

2d. As the name, so the rite itself of constituting a 
primitive Bishop, deserves to be considered; a single 
Bkhop, by the ancient Canons of the Church, and by 
sufficient evidence besides, might ordain a Presbyter or 
Deacon. But to make a Bishop, a whole province of 
Bishops, our learned Enquirer knows, did most common- 
ly assemble, and with the like holy ceremony, by which 
all orders of the Church were conferred, that is, by im- 
position of hands, and prayers, did collate that power and 
character upon him, which ever after, and never before, 
as far as fact and words together can prove it, he was 
invested in; and if the former be the giving of aw order 
by a single hand, and this latter but a licence, as it were, 
to use it; or as our learned Author chooses to express it, 
but a formal instalment into an Episcopal chair; then the 
greater sacred solemnity, this united application of an 
Apostolical rite to it, and this joint synodical invitation of 
the Holy Spirit for it, are all of them to so singular and 
indifferent a purpose as is not to be paralleled, we may 
safely say, in any other ministerial solemnity in the whole 
economy of the Christian Church. 

3d. By this ordination, the promoted Presbyter became 
13* 



14f> AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

a member of a distinct ecclesiastical college, from all 
other officers or ministers in the Church, from whence 
St. Cyprian so peculiarly calls the Bishop his colleagues 
in that higher function with him, which, as humble as he 
was, he never once applied to * Presbyters or Deacons; 
and we know one immediate effect of it was, that he 
gained a ruling 'power over both of them, though he was 
but a co-ordinate brother to the highest of them before; 
and such as are curious to see how such distinct colleges 
implied distinct orders in them, in the nature of the 
thing, may find it learnedly argued by the late singularly 
learned and inquisitive antiquary Mr. Dodwell, in his 
tenth dissertation upon St. Cyprian. But, 

4th. This promoted Presbyter, from the time he had 
passed under the provincial imposition of hands, acquired 
a prerogative and jurisdiction parallel to that of God's 
High-Priest amongst the Jews. Thus St. Cyprian not 
only makes the rebellion of his Presbyters and others 
against him, of the same kind with that of Corah, Dathan, 
and Abiram against Aaron, but affirms the same law 
which God gave for the High-Priest, or any the supre- 
mest ruler whatsoever, to judge decisively in the great 
council of their sanhedrim, and to punish the offender, 
did authorize the Christian Bishop to judge and censure 
rebellious schismatics within his jurisdiction. So f he 
assures Rogatian, a Bishop of his province, and applies 

* The Enquiry affirms the contrary, p. 74, But no proof, as I shall 
make appear in its proper place . 

f Cu-.n pro episcopatus vigore et cathedrae autoritate haberes potes- 
tatem. qua possas Je illo statim vindicari, habens circa hujusmodi 
homines praecepta divina, cum Dominus Deus in Deuteronomio dicit, 
et homo quicunq ; fuerit in superbia ut non exaudiat sacsrdotem, &c» 
Cypr. Ep. 3. $ !♦ Edit. Oxon, 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 147 

it to his own and Cornelius's case, in another* Epistle; 
where he gives us a farther character of his promoted 
Presbyter's dignity too, viz: that he was then become 
the one judge, as well as the one high Priest, and Christ's 
Vicegerent in the Church. Farther, he is from that time 
peculiarly ranked in the number of the Apostles' succes- 
sors, to whom they themselves committed their Churches, 
and delivered up to them their place of mastership, or 
magisterial authority in them. So f Irenseus says in 
plain terms, and in that very place where he was prov- 
ing orthodoxy from the personal succession of them, 
which our % Enquirer owns related to the supreme Pres- 
byter or Bishop alone. Again, St. Cyprian || minds 
Cornelius Bishop of Rome , to he zealous with him of the 
unity of the Church, because it came from the Lord, and 
by the Apostles says he to us their successors. § Firmil- 
ian styles Bishops the Apostle's successors by a vicarious 
ordination. *fi And t the confessor, Clarus a Mascula, a 
Bishop in the Carthaginian council under St. Cyprian, 

* Cypr. Ep. 59. ^ 4. Unus in Ecclesia ad tempus sacerdos, et ad 
teropus judex vice Christi. 

t Habemus annumerare eos qui ab Apostolis instituti sunt episcopi 
inecclesis — his vel maxime ea [sc. recondita mysieria] traderent, qui- 
bus etiam ipsas Ecclesias committebant — successors relinquebant, 
suum ipsorum locum magisterii tradentes. Iren. lib. 3. cap. 3. 

JEnq.p. 13, 13. 

|] Ut unitadem a dominio et per Apostolos nobis successoribus tradi- 
tam, quantum possumus obtinere curemus. Cyp. Ep. 45. ad Cornel, 
p. 88. Edit. Oxon. 

$ — Et episcopis, qui eis (sc, Apostolis) ordinatione vicaria succes- 
serunt. Ep. Firmil. inter Ep. ( 'ypi' • 75. p. 225. 

V Manifesta est sententia domini nostri Jesu Christi Apostolos suos 
mittentis, et ipsis solis potestatem a patre sibi datam permittentis, 
quibusnos successimus, cadempotestate ecclesiam domini gubernantes. 
ConciL Cartbag. apudCypr. Suffrag. 79. p. 242. 



148 A# ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

gives this unanswerable suffrage for it. The sentence 
says he, of our Lord Jesus Christ is manifest, who sent 
Ms Apostles, and granted to them alone the power which 
was given to him of the father, whom we succeed, governing 
the Church of the Lord with the same power. Lastly, he 
presided in the consitory to use * St. Ignatius' words, 
in the place of God, whilst the Presbyter in analogy to 
that comparison, sat as a college of Apostles under him, 
and then the Deacons as entrusted with the ministerial 
service of Jesus Christ. Very singular phrases! for ex 
pressing officers, whereof any two were of the same order. 
These and many such characters of a common Presby- 
ter, after ordination by provincial Bishops, which it 
would be tedious to set down, are frequently to be met 
with in the writings of the primitive fathers, whereof not 
one of them was attributed to him till then, or to any in 
that inferior station wherein he stood before; and if these 
accessions of superlative titles, prerogative, and jurisdic- 
tion, denote no other order conferred upon him than he 
had before, it will be very difficult to conceive, in what 
sense the Jewish High-Priest, the Christian Apostles, the 
supreme judges and rulers in societies, or the peculiar 
Vicegerents of God himself, are of a higher order in 
Church or state, than all other men of whatsoever dignity 
or station in any of them besides. Not to mention the 
unaccountable notion of an inherent character, fully and 
completely stamped, and virtually resting in every Pres- 
byter, from their first ordination, of the same nature with 
this of a Bishop; which is as much as to say, that the 
Holy Spirit in the government of the Church does, by 

* TlpoKaOTjjxsvs Tit ema/corcs et$ Torrov Bey, tcai rcov TTpts&vlipwv nj roinv 
&ovt$pi* T<i>v arros'oXtav , Kai tu)V Siclkovuv mms'iVfJitvwv SiaKQViav lyou X/HS"** 
Igoat* Ep. ad Magnus. $ 6. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHUKCII, &C. 14$ 

sacred ministerial acts, confer such spiritual powers and 
characters upon numbers of men before-hand, which not 
one in twenty, by modest computation, shall in the course 
of providence ever stand in need of; for in such propor- 
tion, it is more than likely, I think, that every Presbyter 
shall not be made a Bishop. It is time enough to have 
all, when they are called to use them, and the provincial 
ordinations were undoubtedly instituted that they should, 
not want them then. 

But all this must be nothing; let Bishops be never so 
sacredly ordained for their particular function, and gov- 
ern every order of men in their Churches with an Apos- 
tolical authority and jurisdiction, as peculiar to them 
alone, as it was to the Apostles themselves; their order is 
no whit advanced by it, though such sort of qualifications 
distinguish orders of men in every society besides, so 
long as the Presbyters also had a right and power to dis- 
charge * all clerical offices (there the crisis lies) as fully to 
all intents and purposes, as any Bishop in the world. 

I will join issue with our learned author in this Enquiry 
also; and doubt not, but we shall meet with great mis- 
takes here: though w T e shall find an equality of sovereign* 
ty in the government of the Church, as nicely contended 
for all along, as that of clerical offices are, notwithstand- 
ing he disavowed such an equal sovereignty as that, at 
the first stating of his Presbyter's case_. This is evident, 
I think, in the first instance of his Presbyter's authority; 
which is this; They presided, says he, in Church consis- 
tories, and composed the executive part of the ecclesiastical 
power; that is, they were joint commissioners in the ju- 
dicial power there, and so far, upon the level with the 
Bishop himself, in judging causes that came before them^ 

* See Enq, p. 57. 



150 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

else they might be as justices of the peace to judges in 
civil courts, if they had not a judicial power as well as 
he; or as privy counsellors to a king, which would doubt- 
less lower their order below their Bishops, and not come 
up to his case. But by the choice of his quotation for 
it, we may be sure he meant no less; for approved El- 
ders presided, says Tertullian, which our learned * au- 
thor here applies to his Presbyters fitting in their pecu- 
liar consistory; and to shew how great stress is laid upon 
this short quotation, it is offered us in the next leaf again, 
to help a weak authority out, which otherwise could not 
prove what our author was zealously contending for 
there; namely, that Bishops and Presbyters had an equal 
power in them to baptize, confirm, and ordain. 

These are pretty material points, you will say, to de- 
pend so much, as really they do here, upon this short 
•disputed sentence at the best ; and that with this supposi- 
tion in the case, that both this and the other parallel quo- 
tation in the next leaf, were spoken of the discipline ex- 
erted in one particular Church or Parish, in which there 
was but one Bishop; and if only he had presided, then 
there could not have been Elders in the plural number. 
Thus "(" he states the argument himself. 

The reader will excuse me, if I am a little more par- 
ticular than ordinary in examining these authorities; the 
-case is of moment, though the words are few; and to lay 
the supposition, here insisted upon, in a clear light, I 
shall be obliged to consider these three things; 1st, The 
occasion of the words : 2d, The plain sense and meaning 
of them: And 3d, Compare the parallel places, to shew 
how they illustrate one another. 

* Probati president .sfiniores. Tertul. Apol. c, 39, 
t Enq. p. 01, 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 151 

1st, The occasion of Tertullian's words was this; * 
the Christians were under a general persecution in the 
Roman empire. Tertullian dedicating an apology for 
them, to the several f governors of the empire, vindicates 
them as they lay jointly charged, under the general 
name of a factious sect in the state. Accordingly, at 
the very entrance of that part of his apology, wherein 
he represents the innocent manner, both of the Christian 
discipline and worship; and whereof the quotation, now 
in question, is a part, he prefaces it in these words: ij: Now, 
says he, I" will shew you plainly what this Christian fac- 
tion is taken up about, or how they are employed; surely 
this Christian faction, which is not only a noun of mul- 
titude, but in the sense which the Roman governors un- 
derstood it, comprehended the whole bod} 7 of Christians 
in it, must be meant in the same sense by the sagacious 
apologist too, who professedly undertook to vindicate 
them all; and not for any single congregation of them in 
some private quarter of the empire; else the Roman gov- 
ernors, to whom he addresses in all parts, had but slender 
motives offered them to cense their persecution in every 
province; and the good apologist had but little regard to 
the common cause of all his brethren. 

But, 2d, To come to the plain sense and meaning of 
the words themselves, approved Elders preside: And 
here I am contented, the learned Enquirer himself should 
be his own interpreter and commentator for me; for at 
the 19th page of this Enquiry, he was zealously proving 
from the testimony of antiquity, that a Bishop could have 

* Cperata sectoe hujus mfestatio; odii erga nomen Christiannrum. 
Apol. p. 1. 

t Vobis, Roraani Imperii Antistites. Apol. in Exord. 

\ Edam jam nunc ego ipse negotia Christianae factionis. Cap. 39. 



152 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

hut one communion table in his Diocese; and amongst oth- 
er authorities, insisted earnestly upon these words of 
* Tertullian, that Christians received the Sacrament of 
the Lord's Supper from the hands of the Bishop alone; 
so he translates the passage, which, as you may see in 
the margin here, is from the hand of those who preside. 
Now if those who preside in Tertullian's language, must 
needs be no other than the supreme Bishops themselves; 
without which construction, all the argument in it, which 
the Enquirer makes for a Congregational Diocese, is ut- 
terly lost there. Then his approved presiding Elders, in 
the quotation now before us, must necessarily be spoken 
also of the Bishops or heads of several Churches or 
congregations within the Roman empire, because a sin- 
gle one could have but one such Elder belonging to it, in 
the declared opinion of the learned Enquirer himself; and 
then what will become of the two important points built 
upon this supposition alone, that Tertullian spake but of 
one congregaticn ? I shall trust to this evidence for the 
plain meaning of the words, and proceed, 

3d, To consider that parallel place of another primi- 
tive father, which, in the opinion of our judicious f au- 
thor himself, and, as he tells us, of most learned men with 
him, is so plainly of the same import and signification 
with this, that they mutually explain one another. Th e 
passage is in a noted epistle of Firmilian to St. Cyprian; 
and, in the Enquirer's own translation, is rendered thus: % 
All power and grace is constituted in the Church where 

* Nee de aliorum mami, quam de piaesi lentium sumimus. Tert. de 
Cor. Mil. c. 3. p. 121. Edit. 2. Rioalt. 

1 Enq. p. 61. 

\ Quando omnis potestas et gratia in Ecclasia constituta sit, ubi 
president rnajores natu, qui et baptizandi, et rnanum imponendi, et 
ordinandi possident potestatem. Apud Cypr, ftp. 75. § 6. Edit. Oxon 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 153 

seniors preside, who have the power of baptizing, confirm- 
ing, and ordaining. Now I readily agree, that this pas- 
sage, and the former in Tertullian, do help to explain 
one another; and chiefly in these following particulars, 
upon which the present application of them does mainly 
depend. 

1st , That whereas there was some scruple raised from 
the words of Tertullian, whether he was speaking of the 
collective body of Christians, or no; there is no room for 
any such question to he made here, since the immediate 
occasion of Firmilian's words was to prove this, that out 
of the Catholic Church there was no grace or power 
given to ratify any one ministerial act whatsoever. Ev- 
ery one knows, who ever read that Epistle, it was the 
invalidity of heretical baptism which he was there con- 
tending for, against the contrary decree of Stephen, Bish- 
op of Rome, about it; and that controversy, I presume 
all men will allow, was between the Catholic Church col- 
lectively considered on the one hand, and all manner of 
heresies and schisms, of whal soever kind, on the other. 
So that the Church, wherein Firmilian affirms, the Ma- 
jores natu, or seniors, did preside, invested with such a 
fulness cf power for effectually executing every ecclesi- 
astical office in it, was no less than the Universal Church 
of Christ upon earth, as it stood distinguished from all 
sorts of sects, who separated from her; and in this mate- 
rial particular, this parallel place of Firmilian may help 
a doubting reader to understand what sort of Church 
Tertullian also meant, wherein his approved Elders did 
preside. And then, 

2d, As to the common word of presiding, used by both 
the venerable fathers alike; if Firmilian's sense of it 
should not be clear enough for us, yet Tert Lillian's notion 
14 



154 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

of a. president, or presiding Elder in a Church, being so 
plainly interpreted by our learned Enquirer, as we have 
seen already, to be the single or supreme Bishop of the 
Church he presided in, in this particular Tertullian may 
be said to expound Firmilian's meaning for us, and satisfy 
the reader, that his presiding seniors were no less than 
such supreme Bishops also, in exact conformity to St. 
Cyprian's language too, who says of the Christian Bish- 
ops in general, * that they were cetate antiqui, ancient in 
years, that is, seniors, as well as sound in faith. And 
yet, 

3d, Let Firmilian be allov T ed to explain himself more 
fully. In the next paragraph he had a fair occasion to 
do it; and accordingly he did. He was arguing, as we 
observed before, and the whole Epistle shews it, against 
Stephen, Bishop of Rome, and his party, who maintained 
imposition of hands sufficient for admitting a baptized 
heretic into the Church, without any farther baptism 
than whajt they had in their heresy; and his argument 
against it runs thus: How is this, says he, that when we 
see Paul baptized his Disciples again after John's bap- 
tism, we should make any doubt of baptizing them who 
return from heresy to the Church after that unlawful and 
profane baptism of theirs, unless Paul was less than 
these Bishops, of whom we are speaking now, f that these 
indeed might give the Holy Ghost by imposition of hands 
.alone; but Paul was insufficient for it. Here we plainly 

■•* *PeiTi<amnes provincias ct per uibes singula?,, ordinati sunt Episcopi 
an setate ai^iqui, in fide integri. Cypr. Ep. 55. p. ] 12. Edit. Oxon. 

f, Quale; egt.autem, &c. nisi si his Episcrpi?, de quibus nunc, minor 
fuit Paulus, utbi quidem possint per solam manna impositionem veni- 
entibus Hseretieis dare sp. sanctum, Paulus autem idcneus aon fuerit. 
.Apud Cypr. Ep, 75. 4 6. p. 221. Edit. Oxon. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 



155 



see what kind of seniors in the Church Firniihan was 
speaking of, and to whom he attributed the right of bap- 
tism, imposition of hands, and ordination, just before; for 
those who were to lay their hands upon the returning 
heretics, the immediate subject then in hand, he calls by 
the proper and express name of Bishops, an incommuni- 
cable term to any inferior Elders of the Church, if we 
may believe approved * antiquaries, in that Cyprianic 
age; and, I make no doubt of it, could any instance to 
the contrary be given, our learned author, who has a 
collection of honorary titles for his Presbyters, and ar- 
gues zealously upon them, would scarce have overlooked 
it, or failed to have told us where it might be found. 

Thus I have given the clear and genuine sense both of 
Tertullian and Firmilian's expressions together; from 
whence it appears, 

1st, That the Presbyter's ruling power in the consisto- 
ry, as joint commissioners with their Bishop there, which 
was the first main point they were brought to prove, can- 
not be grounded upon either of them, since they have no 
•relation to the private presbytery of a particular Church 
at all, but were manifestly spoken with reference to the 
single supreme governors, or Bishops of all the several 
Dioceses, either within the Roman empire, or the whole 
Catholic Church. And, indeed, I would gladly under- 
stand how our ingenious author disposes "of the Up^o^iSpia, 
or right of the first chair in the primitive Presbyteries, 
by which he and his friends so nicely evade the Bishop's 
higher order in the Church, if all his Presbyters were 
presidents there, as the application of these quotations to 
them does literally make them to be. But, 

* See Bishop Pearson and Mr. Dochvell in Pearson's Dissert, prima. 
m sncces. prim. IZom. Episc. c. 2. p. 97. in 4to. Lon I, 1G68. 



156 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

2d, By this apparent sense of the holy father's words, 
it appears also, that the only passage in antiqmt}^ our 
inquisitive author could present us with, to prove the 
Presbyters' right and power to ordain, contains no such 
matter in it; but, on the contrary, places all power of 
baptism, confirmation, and ordination, in the Bishops' 
possession, for such we find Firmilian's seniors in the 
Church to be. 

Yet, since a full power to ordain could not be found 
for his Presbyters, our Enquirer claims a share, at least, 
from that noted case of Timothy's being ordained * by, 
or rather with, the laying on of the hands of the Presby* 
tery. Now this is saying more for Calvin's cause, than 
Calvin could say for himself; for he disowns it plainly, f 
that a college of Presbyters was meant by the Presbyte- 
ry there, and maintains it, as his opinion, that St. Paul 
ordained Timothy alone, from 2 Tim. i. 6. And the 
assembly of English divines £ go so far with him, as to 
own / that all the gifts which Timothy received at his or- 
dination, were from the Apostle's hands upon him. It 
cannot be denied, therefore, that the two different ac- 
counts, though not contrary ones to be sure, of Timo- 
thy's ordination, with the Presbytery in one text, and by 
St. Paul's own hands in the. other, has occasioned variety 
of speculations upon them; and therefore it must be a 
feeble argument, at the best, which depends on a positive 
construction of either of them. And yet, the utmost it 

* 1 Tim. iv. 14, 

t Paulus ipse, se, non alios complures, Timotheo manus imposuisse 
eommemoiat; quod de impositione manuum Presbyterii dicitur, non 
ita accipio, quasi Paulus de seniorurn colleg'o loquaiur. Calv. Instil* 
]. 4. c, 3. in fine. 

4 See Assemb. Annot. on 2 Tim. i. 6. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 157 

Can afford so, is only a concomitant act of an inferior 
order with an Apostle himself, and in a case of divine 
designation by prophecy too; which, since it can be no 
great ground of controversy amongst ourselves, where 
the like kind of practice of Presbyters joining in imposi- 
tion of hands with their superiors in every ordination of 
their own order, is constantly in use, I need say the less; 
and shall only observe here, that our learned Enquirer 
grounds his sense of it upon this; * That the constant sig- 
nification of the word Presbytery, in all the writings of the 
ancients, is such as he here insists upon, that is, it always 
denotes the Bishops and Presbyters of a particular Church 
or Parish, as his terms for a Diocese are. 

Yet, I am very sure, St. Ignatius calls the Apostles 
■alone the Presbytery of the Church: For he tells the f Phi- 
ladelphians, in his way to the Crown of Martyrdom, 
that he betook himself to the Apostles as Hie Presbytery of 
the Church, And since Timothy was. ordained whilst 
these superlative Presbyters were alive, and by an emi- 
nent one of them, I know no fairer comment upon the 
Apostolical phrase of his being ordained by the laying on 
of the hands of the Presbytery, than that he was ordained 
by a special member of this Apostolical Presbytery; and 
if by more than so, it was, neither impossible, nor unlike- 
ly, then, that some other Apostle, ojr Apostles, might 
concur with St. Paul in it; especially, if we consider that 
Timothy's first ordination may reasonably be dated from 
the time that St. Paul would have him go forth with Ivim,, 
Acts xvi; 3. which surely was for the work of the minis- 

*See Enq. p. 62,. and 78. 

t npoetyvyuiv. rots <nr$s'o\ois ) «s vpzaCvleptu ckk^tjckis «. Igv at, ad Phila- 
delphia * 3. 

*14 



158 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

try, and that at Derbe or Lystra, not much above * four 
years after the gospel was first preached there, when a 
settled consistory of inferior Presbyters, and a form of 
Ecclesiastical discipline in it, could scarcely be expected 
amongst them. 

How far the Presbyters' part in the ordination is men- 
tioned in this sacred text, together with the testimonies of 
Tertullian and Firmilian before, which are all the author- 
ities our inquisitive author offers us, has proved the pow- 
er of ordination to be fully inherent in them, I must leave 
the reader to judge; and whether they are of weight 
enough to balance the unanimous consent of the Catholic 
Church to the contrary, for fifteen hundred years togeth- 
er; whilst not so much as a single example can be found 
of the Presbyters practising such a power, without pub- 
lic? censure and protestation against it, in all that time. 

Two other instances of ruJing 'power in the Presbyters 
are these; they excommunicated, says he, and they re- 
stored penitents to the Church. The proof of the first is 
thus: Felicissimus, Augendus, and some others had made 
a schism in St. Cyprian's Church; the holy Bishop in 
exile is acquainted with it by two of his Presbyters, Ro- 
gatianus and Numidicus, whom he had left in joint com- 
mission with two Bishops of the province, Caldonius and 
Herculanus, to inspect his Diocese in his absence. To 
these four St. Cyprian writes a letter, and having told 
them what evidence he had had of Felicissimus' notorious 
wickedness, sends this positive order to them; f Let him 
receive the sentence, says he, which he has first passed 

* See Bishop Pearson's Annal. Paul, ab A. D. 46. ad A. D. 50. 
inclusive . 

1 Accipiat senteatiam, quam prior dixit ut abstentum s© a nobis 
sciat, Cypr. Ep. 41. Edit. Oxon. p. 80. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 159 

himself, that he may know he is excommunicated by us; 
for he had threatened excommunication to such as ad- 
hered to St. Cyprian, and * Let any other who joins to that 
faction, know also, that he shall not communicate in the 
Church with us. Little advice with Presbyters here, 
and less left for them to do. In answer to this letter, 
Caldonius with the two Presbyters, and other Bishops 
together, send word to St. Cyprian, that j" they had shut 
out Felicissimus, Augendus, and others from their com- 
munion. Now what Caldonius, and the other Bishops 
here concerned, did, in conformity to Catholic practice, 
shutting out from their Churches also, such as St. Cy- 
prian had thus excommunicated from his, is no great 
matter to us, but that the two Presbyters did no more 
than execute St. Cyprian's censure in his Church, is as 
plain matter of fact, I think, as words can make it; and 
accordingly the learned Bishop Fell's £ note upon it, does 
a so many words make it so. This excommunicating 
>ower then of St. Cyprian's Presbyters, is just such an 
me as any Vicar or Curate in the Church of England 
exercises, when by virtue of an order from their Bishop's 
~)ourt, they deny communion to a censured member, 
md make their return of it; and that it was no more than- 
;o in respect of the Presbyters' power of excommunica- 
ting and absolving again in St. Cyprian's Church at that 
time, will need no more proof, I hope, when we consider 
j| that that holy Bishop authorized the very Deacons, as 

* Sed et quisquis se conspiration! et factioni ejus adjunxerit, sciat se 
in Ecclesia non esse nobiscum communicaturum. lb. 

t Abstinuimuscommunicatione Felicissimum, Augendum, &c, Ep. 41^ 

J Abstinuimus sententiam a Cyprian o latam executioni mandando* 
Fel. in loc. 

|| Non expectata praBsentia nostra apud presbyterum quemcunq; 
praesentem, vel si presbyter repertus non fuerit, et urgere cxitus caperit,. 



160 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

well as Presbyters, in his absence, to receive dependent's 
confession, and by the solemn ministerial act of imposition 
of hands to absolve them, if need required, that is, to bind 
or loose them as effectually as if he had done it himself; 
and I believe our learned Enquirer will not infer from 
hence, that those Deacons had a power of the keys inhe- 
rent in their orders, because they could thus exercise it 
with their Bishop's leave; and yet if he will argue after 
the same manner, as he does from one end to the other of 
this scheme, he must grant that; for his fundamental hy- 
pothesis is nothing more than this, that the Presbyter's 
order was equal to the Bishop's, because they could, with 
his leave, exercise every clerical office which the Bishop 
himself could do. Some of those acts I have already 
shewn, and particularly that of ordination, they never* 
did, nor can it any ways be proved they could do; and I 
shall prove it afterwards, I think, in more, and I hope our 
ingenious author will think it worth his considering, what 
a confused equality of all orders in the Church will ensue, 
if every Ecclesiastic be allowed to have the same order 
with the supreme, who can execute such ministerial 
offices as he shall require him, in his stead, to do. The 
case of St. Cyprian's Deacons, just now mentioned, is a 
sufficient instance of it; and more of that kind will appear 

in considering the next head, which is this: 

Though as to every particular act of the * Bishop's of 

fice, says our learned author, it could not be proved that a 

Presbyter did discharge them; yet it would be sufficient, if 

we could prove in general that he could, and did do so. 

To make this out, he quotes two letters of St. Cyprian 

apud diaconum quoq: exomologesin facere delicti sal possit, ut manu 
eis in pcenitentiam imposita veniant ad dominum cum pace. Cypiy 
Ep. 18. Edit. Oxon. 
* See Enq. p. 62. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 161 

to his clergy } * wherein he exhorts, begs and commands 
them, to discharge their own and his office also, that so 
nothing might be wanting, either to discipline or diligence. 
And again, f that they would, in his stead, perform those 
offices which the Ecclesiastical dispensation requires. This 
is partly answered, by what we have heard of the Pres- 
byters' and Deacons' ministerial acts, by his leave and 
instructions above. Yet I may farther ask this plain 
question still: Why are these letters quoted to prove the 
Presbyters only could do the Bishop's business for him? 
They are both £ directed to the Deacons as well as Pres- 
byters expressly by name, and the command given to 
both jointly without any distinction; which, since the 
Deacons, as we see before, had used the keys for him, 
why not they entrusted with such an executive part of 
his Episcopal power as was intended here, being ad- 
dressed to one as well as the other? especially since St. 
Cyprian, in the close of the latter epistle, || grieved to 
hear that his people would not be governed by Deacons or 
Presbyters either; implying fairly enough, that he had en- 
trusted his governing power as far as it could be dis- 
charged by a deputation, to both of them. So little does 
it prove an equality of order in St. Cyprian's sense and 
practice, for inferior Ecclesiastics to do those clerical 

* Fungamini illic et vestris partibus ac meis, ut nihil vel acl discipli- 
namvel ad diligentiam dent. Cypr. Ep. 5. § 1. 

•f-His Uteris et hortor et raando ut vos; vice mea fungamini circa 
gerenda ea, quse administrate religiosa deposcit. Ep. G. $ 2 . alias Ep, 
14. Edit. Oxon. 

J Cypr. presbyt3i'is et diaconis fratribus. Tit. Ep. 5. et 14. Edit. 
Oxon. 

II Doleo enim quando audio quosdam improbe, &c. nee a diaconis 
aut presbyteris regi posse. Ep . 14. 



162 AH ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

offices by his Bishop's order and leave, which his char- 
acter otherwise did not allow him to do. 

We have a form of words in our own Church discip- 
line, which very much resembles this; for an English 
Bishop instituting a parochial Priest, says thus: * Take 
my Cure upon you, and your own too; and I believe no 
man ever imagined that the instituted clerk had a power 
in him to visit, confirm, or ordain in any one part of the 
Diocese; though a trust of his Bishop's Cure, in our au- 
thor's way of reasoning, would infer so much. But St. 
Cyprian's commission to his Presbyters and Deacons, had 
a clause in it sufficient to explain this; which is likewise 
implied in our institutions, and in all such general com- 
missions as those; j" Perform such offices, says he, for 
yourselves and me, as the Ecclesiastical dispensation re- 
quires; that is, as much of it as your orders and station 
in the Church can allow of. Could our author have 
proved that the Presbyters or Deacons had ordained, for 
instance, so much as one single clerk in the Church in 
St. Cyprian's absence, by virtue of this great trust re- 
posed in them, it had been something to the purpose; but 
since there is no tittle of any such thing in all St. Cypri- 
an's works, or in any collateral history to be found, but 
on the contrary, that St. Cyprian hims:lf in his retire, 
ment % ordained such as the necessities of the Church re- 
quired; I must confess I cannot see that the argument 
proves any thing that it was brought for. 

Upon the whole matter, I rather conceive that the in- 
genious author, by unwarily offering to public view this 
commission of St. Cyprian to his Presbyters and Deacons 

* Accipe curatn tuarn et raeam . GoJolph, Repert. Ca^on. c. 24. 
f See the quotation before. 
JSee Cyp/Ep. 29,28, 39, &c. 



THE PKIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 



163 



together, to discharge his part for him, without any mark 
of discrimination in either of the epistles, has discovered 
that plain truth which overturns his whole hypothesis at 
once; namely, that to be qualified to discharge a clerical 
office by the Bishop's leave for it, is no proof at all that 
the person so discharging it, had a power to do it before, 
inherent in his own orders; for some share of govern- 
ment in the Church, at least, and the power of the keys, 
in some signal instances of it, might be proved inherent 
in the Deacon's orders from this very commission of their 
Bishop to them, and from what we have seen them en- 
trusted to do before; if that way of reasoning were true. 
And yet on this single thread hangs all that our Enquirer 
has hitherto offered, to make the orders of his Presbyters 
equal with the highest in the Church. 

He strengthens the two authorities from St. Cyprian's 
letters, with a third * from the Presbyters at Rome, to 
them at Carthage; both those Churches were destitute of 
a Bishop at that time; Fabianus of Rome newly mar- 
tyred in the Decian persecution, and St. Cyprian retired 
upon the account of it. The Carthaginian Presbyters, 
on this occasion, write to their brethren at Rome; and 
those at Rome, in their answer to them, write thus: f And 
since it is incumbent on us, who seem to be governors, and 
to keep the flock instead of a Pastor; if we should be found 
negligent, it will be said to us, as it was to tho e careless 
governors [the shepherds of Israel] before us, Ezekiel 

* Eoq. p. 63. 

f Et cum incumbat nobis, qui videmur piaepositi esse, et vice pasto- 
ris custodire gregem, si neg'igemes inveniamur, dicetur nobis quod et 
antecessoribus nostris dictum est, qui tarn negligentes propositi erant; 
quoniam perditum non requisiviir.u?, errantom non correximus, et 
claudum non colligavimus, et lac eorum edebamus, et lanis eorum ope- 
riebamur. Cypr. Ep. 8. $1. Edit. Oxon. 



164 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

xxxiv. 3, 4. that we looked not after that which was lost, 
we did not correct him that wandered, nor bound up him 
that was lame; but we did eat their milk; and were covered 
with their wool. 

Now, the argument from this passage runs thus: The 
Presbyters in these Churches, having no Bishop amongst 
them, seemed themselves to be, as it were, Bishops of the 
Churches, and therefore they not only seemed so, but in 
power and order, actually were such, even as much as 
any before them ever were, or the next in succession 
could be; for so the argument supposes. 

And if that be so, I wonder what those very Presbyters 
meant, to tell St. Cyprian in their letter to him very soon 
afterwards, * That there was a greater necessity lay upon 
them, to put off the restitution of the lapsed in their Church 
for the present, because they had no Bishop amongst them, 
who should order all those things, and could with authority 
and council take a proper course with them. It seems, 
those Presbyters were conscious of a peculiar authority 
in a Bishop, which was wanting in themselves. And so 
just they were indeed in the words of the quotation before 
us, as to say no more of themselves, than that they were 
seemingly the governors of the Church, or, as it were, 
Bishops in it, as our Enquirer chooses to translate it; 
very suitable phrases for such guardians of 'the spirituals 
ties as Dean and Chapter usually have been, and in ma- 
ny cases are at this day, for a vacant See; and yet their 
order different enough from his, who in a little time is to 
put an end to their trust. Such trustees do all, which 

* Quanquam nobis differencial hujus rei necessi'.as major incumbat, 
quibus; nondiim est Episcopus constitulus, qui omnia ista moderelur, 
et eorum, qui lapsi sunt, possit cum auctoriate et consilio habere ratio- 
nem . Cypr. Ep. 30. $ 6 . Edit, Oxon. 



THE PEI3IITIVE CHURCH, &C. 165 

for a time may be necessary, not every act of clerical or 
ministerial power which a proper officer, when invested 
in it, can do. This would appear to be the very sense of 
the Roman Presbyters, to any who perused their epistle, 
without prejudice in the case; for they specify, as well as 
speak in general, of the care which was incumbent on 
them; but not a tittle, amongst all, of supplying the 
Church, if need were, with new ordained ministers, or 
confirming after baptism, or the like. What sort of care 
do they mention then? Why! that of exhortations to the 
flock, not to fall away; to administer to the ivants of all; 
to give Christian burial to the martyrs; and, to speak all 
freely, without reserve, one material advice they give to 
the Carthaginian Presbyters, which may be a key to us 
to solve a very nice difficulty in the present argument; 
and that is, they exhort them, after their example, * to 
move the lapsed to repentance, if per adventure they might 
obtain their absolution from him, who was able to give it; 
which must either be meant of God alone, since absolu- 
tion of apostates to idolatry had not yet been decreed in 
the Church, as th? excellent Bishop Fell observes upon 
the place, or at least must signify their own incapacity 
for it at Rome, for want of that authority to do it, which 
they owned to St. Cyprian belonged to the Bishop only; 
and yet forasmuch as the Catholic Church had solemnly f 

. * Non minimum periculum incumDere, si non. hortati fueritis fratres 
Testros stare in fide immobiles; separatos a nobis; hortamur agerepoe- 
iiitentiam, si quo modo indulgentiam poterunt rec.per* ab eo qui potest 
praestare. Si qui cceperint apprehendi ifiimitate, ei agant psenitentiara 
facti sul, et desi ierent communionem, utiq; subveuiri eis debet. Cor- 
pora martyrum si non septliar.tur, grande periculum imminet eisquibu* 
incumbit hoc opus; faciat Deus; ut omnes nos in his operibus inveni- 
amuf. Cyp. Ep. 8. Edit. Oxon. p. 17, 18. 

f Additum est; ut lapsis infirinis et in exitu consiitutis pax daretur j 
15 



166 AN ORIGINAL DItAUGHT OF 

agreed that her peace should be given to all in the dying 
hour, so far, by that general authority from Episcopal 
power they practised themselves, and advised the Cartha- 
ginian Presbyters to do* How far these three authori- 
ties, then, do prove in general what the particulars could 
not do, viz. that Presbyters could do all which a Bishop 
did, I must also leave with the reader to consider again. 

One particular I have postponed indeed, because the 
former and that fell in so much with one another; I shall 
*iow consider it, to shew I pay regard to all this learned 
-author offers; * the Presbyters, says he, confirmed. 

He brings no proof for it here, but promises most evi. 
dent ones in another place; he means, I doubt not, in the 
second part of his Enquiry. I will step out of my way 
u little, to bring his arguments nearer into view. The 
sum of all his thoughts there, is this; f that confirmation 
was a mere part or appendix only of Christian baptism, 
and withal the very same thing with ^ absolution of 'peni- 
tents, in the sense of the primitive Church; and then con- 
cludes, || since Presbyters could baptize and absolve, they 
fiould confirm also. 

To prove it a mere appendix of baptism, he § tells us, 
he meets with unction, signation, and imposition of hands, 
as it were immediately applied /to baptized persons, by 
some of the primitive fathers, at their coming out of the 
water; and I believe he may do so; and he might add r 

Quae literae per totum mundum misssB sunt, et in notiam Ecclesiis omni- 
bus et utiiversis fratribus peilatae sunt, Cypr. acLAntonian. Ep. 55. p* 
.102. Edit. Oxon. 

* Enq. p. 60. 

f See Enq . Part 2 . p. 85, Sic. 

Jib. p. 92. 

g Enq. p. 91. Part 2. and p. 101. 
Enq. p. 80. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 167 

that they were forthwith introduced into the sacred Sy- 
naxis, or solemn assembly of the faithful, to join in all 
the service of the Church, and receive the holy eucha- 
rist, before they parted. Were all these therefore a mere 
appendix of their baptism, because so immediately follow- 
ing upon it, as * Justin Martyr plainly represents it to 
us? As well one as the other, for any force there is in 
this way of arguing. When Catechumens of old had 
been thoroughly disciplined, and by baptism made com- 
plete disciples and members of the Church, there was no 
holy rite or ordinance by which grace was usually con- 
veyed, but the zealous pastors piously administered it to 
their new admitted members, to call down all the bless- 
ings of heaven, as far as in them lay, for strengthening 
their faith, and carrying on that Christian warfare they 
were just engaged in; insomuch as new baptized infants, 
we know, had the blessed eucharist itself then adminis- 
tered to them, and each of these holy rites and adminis- 
trations, we are sensible enough, were very different in 
themselves. 

Not to dwell on words therefore, which, all who know 
primitive discipline must own, are common to sundry rites 
and ministrations in the Church, and therefore conclude 
nothing of themselves; nor yet to gather scattered senti- 
ments to prove a stated practice by them; let us take 
a fair view of confirmation, in a short and full scheme of 
it, as the excellent St. Cyprian has drawn it up for us at 
once. It is in a noted passage of an epistle of his, to this 
purpose; which surely must displease some men very 
much, else they would own something more in it, than 
our learned Enquirer does, who quotes it upon this very 
subject, and thinks it proves confirmation to be a, mere 

* Justin. Apol t 2. p . 97. Colon. 1687, 



168 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

part of baptism, and nothing more. Let the reader judge 
from the holy martyr's words, which are these: * Those 
who believed in Samaria, had believed with a true faith, 
and were baptized within the pale of the Church, which is 
one, and to which alone authority ivas given to confer the 
grace of baptism, and forgive sins, and that by Philip 
the Deacon j whom the sam,e Apostle had sent forth; and 
therefore since they had a lawful and Ecclesiastical bap- 
tism, they ought not to be any farther baptized. But only 
that thing which was wanting, (plainly after their lawful 
and Ecclesiastical baptism) that was done by Peter and 
John, viz. that by prayer offered up for them, and by 
imposition of hands, the holy Spirit should be called upon, 
and poured forth upon them. The same which is in use 
also amongst us at this day, where such as are baptized 
in the Church are presented to the governors of the 
Church, that by our prayer and imposition of hands, they 
may receive the holy spirit, and be consummated by the 
seal of the Lord. 

A few plain questions may help to clear this passage. 

1st, Did St. Cyprian, do we think, believe Philip's bap- 
tism to be imperfect, who was sent forth by the Apostles 
themselves for that purpose? 

* 111! qui in Samaria crediderant, fide vera crediderant, et intus in 
Ecclesia, quae una est, et cui soli gratiam baptisnri dare, et peccata 
solvere, permissum est, a Philippo diacono, quern iidem Apostoli mise- 
rant, baptizati erant. Et idcirco, quia legitimum et eoclesiasticum 
baptisraa consecuti suerant, baptizari eos ultra non oportebat. Sed 
tantummodo quod deerat; id a Petro et Johanne factum est, ut orati- 
onepro eis habita, et manu imposita, in vocaretur et infunderetur super 
eos Spiritus sanctus. Quod nunc quoq ; apud nos geritur, ut qui in 
Ecclesia baptizantur, praepositis Ecclesise offerantur, et per nostram 
orationem ac manus impositionem Spirit um sanctum consequantur, et 
signaculo Dominico consummentur. Cypr. ad Jubaian. Ep. 73. p. 202,, 
Edit. Oxon. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCHj &C. 169 

2d, Would he call a defective baptism, a lawful and 
Ecclesiastical baptism, which is no less than to say, in 
other words, that the Lawgiver himself, the blessed Je- 
sus, and the Church too, would own it for their baptism? 

3d, Did St. Peter and St. John go to Samaria, to per- 
form a ministerial office which Philip could have done 
without them? 

4th, Could St. Cyprian say, they continued the same 
practice in his time, and yet the baptizing ministers then, 
either did, or could as effectually lay their hands on such 
as they baptized for conveying the graces of the holy 
Spirit on them, as those very governors of the Church, to 
whom he affirms they were presented to receive that 
solemn benediction, after the manner it was done at Sa- 
maria. 

5th, and last, Since Presbyters, as well as Deacons,, 
did unquestionably baptize in St. Cyprian's time, and in 
his Church; what could the Catholic Church itself, or 
the holy martyr mean, by such a general custom of of- 
fering baptized persons to the governors of the Church 
upon this occasion? such governors, I mean, as St. Cy- 
prian himself was, for so he explains his meaning, when 
he calls it, our prayer and imposition of hands, by which 
they were to obtain such spiritual gifts, and be consum- 
mated with the seal of the Lord. What could they mean, 
I say, if any who had the power of baptizing, by virtue 
of their orders, might have done that as well? Or how 
could the parallel hold indeed in the whole comparison, if 
such propositi or governors of the Church in St. Cy- 
prian's time bore no analogy of difference from the bap- 
tizing ministers, to that which was between St. Philip 
and the Apostles, from whence the precedent, he assure* 
us ; was immediately taken? 
15* 



170 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

I can conceive no answer to these questions, sufficient 
to remove the evident truth contained in the holy mar- 
tyr's words; namely, that there was a sacred ministerial 
rite then practised in the Church, after baptism, and dis- 
tinct from it; imposition of hands and prayers the princi- 
pal and constant symbols of it; the rite and power of 
administering it not inherent in the powers or orders of 
any baptizing ministers, as such, but peculiar to the high- 
est order in the Church; as the Apostles unquestionably 
were in this original pattern at Samaria; and consequent- 
ly, in our holy martyr's sense of thething,(who allowed 
the Bishops only for peculiar successors to the Apostles 
in the Church,) was appropriated to them alone. 

The misapprehension of this testimony of St. Cyprian, 
and of the primitive Church with him, I perceive by our 
learned Enquirer, Daille,- and others, lies here; they dis- 
tinguish not the operations and gifts of the Holy Ghost 
in the two sacred rites, of baptism, and imposition of 
hands after it, as those primitive fathers did. The fathers 
affirm, that the holy Spirit was present, operated, and 
effectually sanctified both the elemental water, and the 
person baptized in it, before this imposition of hands upon 
him; and therefore St. Cyprian himself calls a baptized 
person, on whom hands had not yet been laid, * a sancti- 
fied person, spiritually formed into a new man; one that 
has put on Christ- and that Christ cannot be put on with- 
out the Spirit. And yet, in reference to the imposition 
of hands, which was to follow, he accounted him only 

*Qui peccatis in bantismo expositis sanctificatus est, et in novum 
hominem spiritualiter forrnatus, ad accipienduai Spin turn sanctum ido^ 

lieus factus est. — Quotquot in Christo baptizati estis, Christum, 

induistis quasi possit sine spiritu Christus indui, &c. Cypr. Ep* 

ad Ppmp,,p. 74, p. 213. Edit, Oxon. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. l7l 

fitted for receiving the holy Spirit, which was farther to 
be infused into him. The reason was this, that foras- 
much as the spirit was given by measure to all men, ex- 
cept the blessed Jesus alone, they understood, that the 
sanctification of the spirit in the holy Laver did princi- 
pally, if not wholly, consist in purging away all sin, in 
forming the new creature, as the quotations above imply, 
and making the baptized person a * temple of God, fit to 
receive all other gifts and graces of the Holy Ghost, 
which Christ promised to his Church; but that these man- 
ifold gifts, and the respective measure of them, according 
as every Christian should stand in need of them, were to 
be communicated to them by the several ordinances and 
ministrations of the Church, as St, Paul says, that the 
ministry of reconciliation with God teas committed to 
them. 2 Cor. v. 18. And the first solemn ministerial 
act of the Church, by which she dispensed such divine 
grace to all her children, after they were brought forth 
from her womb by their perfect new-birth in the holy 
sacrament of baptism, was this imposition of hands with 
prayer for them, as the holy eucharist, soon after, was 
an addition to both. And accordingly, St. Cyprian, with 
above thirty more in council with him, in their answer to 
the synodical epistle of the Bishops of Numidia about 
heretical baptism, in a separate and distinct manner, tells 
those Prelates, that heretics could administer none of 
those three holy rites or ordinances for want of having 
the Spirit amongst them. And, 1st, not baptism, because 
the Spirit was necessary there to sanctify the water for 
washing away of sin. And having cleared that in threa 
paragraphs, then in the fourth they farther add, f Nei~ 

* Templum Dei fieri. lb. 

i Cypr. Ep. 70. { 1. Neminem foris extra Ecclesiam baptizari po*- 



172 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

ther can spiritual unction be among heretics, nor yet the 
eucharist; because they cannot sanctify the creature of 
oil, or can an eucharlst be made by them; distinguishing 
plainly the three holy ministrations, and ascribing the 
grace of the Holy Spirit differently to each of them; in- 
somuch as, in the close of that Epistle, they plainly inti- 
mate each of them to be different sacraments of the 
Church, as they used that word in a larger sense than we 
do now. For, having proved that heretics could admin- 
ister none of them, they conclude in these words: We 
therefore, who are with the Lord, and hold the unity of the 
Lord, * ought to give ike truth of unity and faith to as 
many as return by all the sacraments of divine grace; 
which looks very little like making any one of the three 
a mere part, or appendix, of either of the other, no more 
than Vincentius a Thibari's suffrage does in the council 
under St. Cyprian; where, speaking of the manner of 
receiving penitent heretics, he prescribes this threefold 
means for it; *j* 1st, By imposition of hands in exorcism. 
2d, By regeneration of baptism; and then, says he, thwj 
came to the Pollicitation of Christ, a noted phrase for 
this conferring of the gifts of the Spirit by imposition of 
hands, because it was grounded upon that faithful prom- 
ise of our Lord, That such as believed in him, should have 

se. Oportet mimdari et sanctificari aquam prius, a saceidote, ut 

possit baptismo suo peccata hominis, qui baptizatur, abluere. lb. | 
4. Nee unctio spirituals apud hsereticos potest esse, quando conster 
©leum sanctificari et eucharistiam fieri apud illos omnino non posse*. 

*Dare illisper omnia divina gratise sacramenta mutatis et fidei Ten- 
tatem debemus. lb. $ ult. 

tPrimo, per manus impositionem in exorcismo^ sacundo, perbaptis- 
mi regenerationem ; et tunc possunt ad Christa pollicitationem venire, 
alias autera fieri censeo non debera. Cone. Crothag. Suffr. 37. in 0pw 
Cy\)u 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 173 

rivers of living water [meaning of the spirit of God] flow- 
ing out of them. Which accordingly was made good by 
those miraculous and saving graces together, conferred 
upon the first Disciples by this holy rite of the Apostoli- 
cal imposition of hands; the miraculous ones temporary, 
the other believed to be perpetual, in the judgment and 
practice of the primitive Church; wherein we find the 
successors of those Apostles, as the Bishops were owned 
to be in the government of the Church, continuing that 
sacred rite amongst them for infusing the holy spirit into 
every baptized Christian, as St. Cyprian's express words 
are, in the manifest account he gives us of this whole 
matter, which I have cited to you but now. 

This is that which was still wanting then, after St. 
Stephen's perfect baptism, to the Disciples at Samaria* 
according to the Apostles' own practice, and that of the* 
primitive Church after them. And for want of this ob- 
servation of the gifts of the Spirit being gradually dis- 
pensed by the ministrations of the Church, according to 
the occasions and capacities of all men, which I take to 
be the foundation of the institution of any ordinances, or 
holy rites in the Church, our learned Enquirer and his 
friends, wherever they met with any such expressions as 
these, That the water without the spirit could not sanctify r 
and that, by imposition of hands the spirit was given to 
baptized persons, and the like; which are frequent in St. 
Cyprian and other fathers too; they inferred, that naked 
baptism had nothing of the spirit in it, in those holy fa- 
thers' sense of it; and therefore imposition of hands was 
added to make that perfect; which is an absolute mistake. 
And by that means, the thing which St. Cyprian here 
mentioned, as yet wanting, is constantly perverted, and 
made to signify what he never meant by it; for they all 



174 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

affirmed, and held for certain, that the blessed Spirit was, 
present, and operated powerfully in both of them, in such 
proportion as was needful to make each of them effectual 
to the great ends for which they were first instituted; the 
one to perfect the new birth, the other to sustain the fu- 
ture infirmities of the person who was so born. This, 
latter, in respect to the nature, effects, or ceremonies used 
in it, they sometimes called the seal of the Lord, the polli- 
citation, or promise of the Lord, the holy chrism, or unc- 
ti m, in a singular and eminent manner distinct from any 
other, the invoking and infusing of the spirit into persons 
fitted for it; imposition of hands by the governors of the 
Church, and the like. And this is what our Church de- 
clares she understands by the solemn rite of confirmation 
both in her * Liturgy and Canons. This the baptizing 
Evangelist and Deacon at Samaria could not do. This, 
no less officers in the Church than the blessed Apostles,. 
St. Peter and St. John, went on purpose from Jerusalem 
to do. This, St. Cyprian expressly tells us, such propo- 
siti, or rulers of the Church, as he himself was, did con- 
stantly perform in his time, let the baptizing minister be 
whom they would, provided they were not Bishops them- 
selves; and therefore I can do no less, than own my con- 
viction from such evidence as this, that Presbyters,, as 
distinguished from Bishops ever since that distinction 
made, which is from the very close of the Apostolical age, 
could not confirm. 

It is true, our enquirer strengthens this Argument, ta- 
ken from his Notion of Confirmation being a mere part 
of Baptism, with that Paradox in Primitive Discipline, 
that it was the very same thing with Absolution of Peni- 

*See Order of Confirmation, and the Collects there. Also Can, 
GO, Edit. A. P. 1603. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 



175 



tents also; which is as much as to say, that the new bap- 
tized person is even just now cleansed and purged from 
all his sin; for baptism before imposition of hands, the* 
Enquirer himself says, does that, as indeed all antiquity 
says so with him, and at the same instant, as it Were, he 
makes this cleansed and purified soul enter into the for- 
lorn class of penitents, as one who wants immediate abso- 
lution to reconcile him to God and the Church. Such 
harmony mistakes will make, if we listen to them; but I 
am apt to think they will sound so harsh to most chris- 
tian's ears, that I shall proceed no farther on this subject. 
I have done then with the first general proof offered for 
Presbyters ' equality with their Bishops, in respect to or- 
ders; namely, that they discharged all offices which 
their bishop, did, by his leave and permission for it; and 
therefore their orders equal. 

And, by what has been said, I conceive three things 
may appear: 

1st. That they neither did, nor could discharge all, 
even with such permission for it; and particularly as to 
ordination and confirmation. 

2d. That several of the Ministerial offices, so dis- 
charged by them, did not imply, that their orders alone 
qualified them for it; and particularly as to Excommuni- 
cations and Absolutions; else the Deacon's orders might 
claim the like character too. 

3dly and lastly, That a bare capacity, if it Were inhe- 
rent in them, to discharge such offices by a lawful Superi- 
or's permission, so long as they were not impowered ac- 
tually to do it of themselves, does imply an inferiority of 
order in the very nature of the thing itself. 

If every one of the Clerical acts here specified by the 

♦SeeEnq. Part 2 -p. 86. 



176 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGfrf Op 

Enquirer, and which we have been considering so long, 
do still appear to be inherent in his Presbyters, by virtue 
of their orders alone, then his ingenious and triumphant 
comparison may pass, that, as a man who can truly be 
said to have all his senses, must of necessity be allowed 
to see; So Presbyters, who can do all that a Bishop could 
do, may be owned, as to all these Clerical capacities, to 
have received an episcopal character in their Ordination. 
But if there be any Act or Acts amongst them, which, 
by the evidence we have here produced, they neither did, 
or could do, in the practice or judgment of the Primitive 
Church; tho' we own them to be as perfect in their kind, 
as any order of the Reverend Minsters which the Church 
is happy in, yet they will as certainly want something to 
complete their Episcopal character and order, as a blind 
or deaf man, pardon the comparison the Enquirer has 
framed for me, does want something to perfect all his 
senses. I leave the evidence to clear the case. 

In the mean time, I think it is plain, that Presbyters 
were invested with important trusts in the Church; partly, 
as the Bishop's Curates, to use the Enquirer's proper 
iphrase, in such portions of his general ministerial charge, 
as he could commit to them; and this their orders alone 
qualified them for; and partly, as proper and useful del- 
egates to execute some extraordinary parts of the Epis- 
copal power, by his authority and commission for it. 
These things sufficiently required that they should be 
* upright, merciful, sincere persons, impartial in judg- 
ment of Men and Things, no! hastily receiving reports, 
or rigid in judging of any, which 1 take occasion to men- 
tion here, because St. Polycarp giving such advice as 

See Polycarp's JEb. ad, Philip, T. ad finem vit. Polycarp, in Dr 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 177 

this to Presbyters; in his Epistle to the Church at Philip- 
pi our learned * author inferred from it, that it must 
needs imply no less than a Ruling Power in them, of the 
like nature with that of the Bishops themselves, for so 
his argument required: Whereas their charge, I think, 
is great enough to stand in need of such Apostolical coun- 
sel to them, without setting them on the level with their 
Bishops, if we have no better proof for it than so. 

I come now to the second general proof, which is this;f 
That Presbyters were originally culled by the same title* 
and appellations as the Bishops the;-; selves, and therefor* 
their order equal. I must desire the reader to see what 
has been said to this; at the close of the first chapter 
pag. 18, &c. and in this chapter, pag. 157. And yet 
because the promiscuous and indifferent use of these ti- 
tles in the New Testament, and to the end of the Apostol- 
ical age, occasions some amusement to particular men, 
I shall farther offer such a short account of that matter, 
as is visible in Holy Scripture, and the earliest writers of 
the Church together. 

The scriptures teach us, that when the Apostles had 
founded Churches, they ordained Elders for each of them; 
entrusted those Elders to administer the word and sacra- 
ments amongst them, or to use Paul's words to the elders 
at Miletus, to take care of themselves and all the flocks, 
over which the Holy Ghost, by orders and commission 
from the Apostle's hands to be sure, had made them over- 
fleers, which in our translation is rendered Bishops now; 
and to feed the Church of God, as good shepherds ought 
to do. The titles, doubtless, suited with the charge and 
Ministry they were entrusted withall; and as they were 

* Enq. p. 59. 
■fiwEnq.p. 64. 
16 



178 AN ORIGINAL DEAFGIIT OF 

Eclesiastical officers, and commonly not novices in 
years besides, they were as properly called in the an. 
cient language of the Synagogue, Presbyters of the 
Church too; and accordingly we find these titles indiffer- 
ently applied to them then. Yet all this while, nothing 
is plainer in scripture, than that the Apostles reserved to 
themselves the prerogative of a ruling power over them, 
kept a rod of discipline in their own hands; * censured 
such as deserved it; f delivered unto Satan the disorderly 
amongst them, that is excommunicated their members; 
^expected whole Churches to be obedient to them in all 
things. In short, had the sovereign || Cure of all the 
Churches in their hands; mereover all the Elders we 
read of, § who vere ordained in any Church, before Tim- 
othy and Titus's special commissions, which I shall take 
notice of by and by, had the Apostles hands laid u[,on 
them, and no confirmation, or giving ofHhe Spirit by impc- 
sliiou of hands mentioned throughout the New Testa- 
ment, but by the Apostles alone. This great Preroga- 
tive of Power, then, the Apostles retained still; and no 
specious titles of Presidents, Governors, Bishops, Pastors 
or the like' ^ attributed to the Presbyters or Elders under 
them in the New Testament, lessened it in the least, or 
brought it into question. Their superior character 
amongst them was owned by all. So that during their 
lives or personal government over them, those titles might 
safely and properly enough be promiscuously used for 
any of their subordinate Ministers, whereof they ordained 
many as our * Enquirer believes, ; n particular churches. 

* 1 Cor. iv. 21. t lb. v. 5. } 1 Tim - L S0 « 
112- Cor. ii. 9. i 2. Cor- xi. 23. 

IF Upots-afx cvoi, 1 Thes. v. i£. Ey^sroi, IJeb* xiii. It. Ectctoip^ 
Acts xx. 28. * See Enq . p. 7&. 



THE PHIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 179 

But before the Apostles died, or when Providence *' 
removed them from a personal visitation of their several 
Churches in this or the other Province, we read in the 
earliest records of the Church, that they ordained many 
single persons, taken notice of without any fellow Pres- 
byters besides, over large Cities and Churches, as our 
Enquirer \. observes from Tertullian, that St. John placed 
Polycarp in the Church of Smyrna, and St. Peter ordain- 
ed Clement for the Church of Rome; and Tertullian 
adds, that + the rest of the Churches could prove their 
Bishops to be derived from the Apostles in the same 
manner, and calls those Episcopal Sees, the Apostles 
Chairs in the next leaf; as j| /.- enceus, you may remem- 
ber, told us before, that the Apost'es del vered the Church 
to ihos -', single Bishops, and their Locus Magisterii, or 
place of Government with them; and the Scripture tells us 
plainly enough, that Timothy wns ordained such a singu- 
lar Ecclessiastical Governor for Ephesus, where there 
were § many Presbyters before, and Titus for Crete; for 
it is plain, they had a special commission to ordain El- 
ders, 1 Tin. iii. 15. 2. Tim. 2. Tit. i. 5. to rebuke 
and censure them as well as others, 1 Tim. v. 10. and 
that with all authority, Tit. ii. 15. to judge of doctrine, 
and reject heretics; in a word, to set in order the things 
which were wanting, Tit. i. 5. the very claim of Apos- 
tolical in jiower St. Paul's express words for it; 1 Cor. xi. 
34. and all this so personal a charge, that the Apostle 

*Rcm. xv. 23. tEnq. p, 11. 

J Perinde utiq;et cpsterje exhibent, quos ab Apostolis in Epirco- 
patum constitutes Apostolic! seminis traduces habeant, 'Tertul. de 
jirsescript, p. 243. Edit. fecimda.-Rigalt, Lutet. 1641. 

i| Ire: J . 3, c. 3. 

i See Bishop. Pearson, proof the time when Timothy was left at 
Ephesus^ 



180 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

conjured Timothy, and no others with him, lefore God, 
and the Lord Jesus Chri t, an i tie elect Ange 7 s, that he 
observed these flings without par 'iali'y; 1 Tim. v. 21. and 
as a special reason for his investing him with all this ful- 
ness of power now, and for enjoining him so strictly to 
watch and make a full proof of this his Ministry, he con- 
cludes thus: For I am re: dy to be offered, says he, and the 
time of my departure i at hand; 2 Tim. iv. 6. as if he had 
farther said, and now this former care of mine must be 
yours. 

It is manifest, I think, from hence, that these singular 
President's of the several Churches had sundry parts of 
the Apostle's reserved sovere gn potter conferred upon 
them; never imparted to Presbyters of any denomination 
before, as far as scripture and Primitive Antiquity can 
inform us. These consecrated Presidents then take pos- 
session of the Churches assigned to them, either by the 
Apostles personal Induction of them, was, or with their 
full credentials to be sure. ' In all, or most of those great 
Churches which this Apostolical Institution had allotted 
for them, they must find Presbyters ministering at that 
time, in such capacity as they all along had done with 
entire subordination to the Apostle's supremacy over 
them. These ministering Presbyter then, together with 
the whole Church, receiving such new commissioned 
Presidents amongst them, must manifestly see by those 
reserved Apostolical powers, ofBuling, Ordination, Cen- 
sure, and the like, expressed in Timothy and Titus's com- 
missions to the full, and. no doubt of it, signified sufficient- 
ly to every Church by the Apostles themselves, who thus 
placed them there, that they had an authentic and un- 
questionable right of succeeding in the ordinary jurisdic- 
tion and prerogatives of their departing Apostle over them. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 181 

This is a plain and natural reason, why the first order, 
ot Ecclesiastics in the Primitive Church were so familiarly 
called the Apostle's successors, and perhaps itjwould be 
very hard to assign any other. No wonder then, if such 
apparentsuccessors in that eminency of the Ecclesiastical 
power as these were, should be thought worthy of a dis- 
tinct and singular title from all others, as the Apostles 
had before them; and that the Catholic Church did ac- 
cordingly agree it should be so. The Title of Apostle, 
indeed, was not thought unsuitable to them by many of 
the primitive * writers. Tertullian, as we heard just now, 
calls them, The offsprig of ike Apostolic seed. But in 
a holy reverence to the blessed Twelve, and of the mi- 
raculous gifts in them, the Primitive Church, though 
those very persons themselves presided in it, declined 
the venerable title of Apostles for them; but amongst the 
several appellations, common to many Ecclesiastical offi- 
cers before, they so appropriated that of Bishop to them, 
that St. Ignatus declares at the very j" close of the Apos- 
tolic age, every Christian Church, to thv very utmost 
bounds of all, had a Supreme Governor of that singular 
and peculiar name, by which he was then known. 

Thus I have briefly shewn, how the names of Presbyter 
and Bishop were indifferently used at first; and there was 
no danger of misunderstanding about it, so long as it con- 
tinued so, that is, throughout the Apostolic age; and yet, 
how great occasion was given afterwards for appropria- 
ting one of them to the Supreme Governors of the Church, 

* l o a7ros-oXos KXi^iitf, says Clemens Alex . speaking of Clemens Bish- 
op of Rome. Stromat. lib. 4, p. 516. Cologo. 1688. See Blun- 
ders quotations of seveva.1 such instances in his Apol. p. 85. 

t l&moKOiroi ol Kaja ra. vzpala bpicQivJts tv lyes XpijS yvw/^J? UQiv* Ep. ad 
Polycarp. i 3. 

16* 



182 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

whose peculiar character and powers required no lessl 
and accordingly we find it has been so from that very 
time to this. Had our learned Enquirer therefore prov- 
ed his Presbyter to be indifferently styled a Bishop still, 
after this epoch of time we are here speaking of, in the 
familiar language of the Church, he had done more for 
him than all his collection of equivocal titles besides can 
amount to; for one incommunicable title to denote a 
superior order by, is as much as the highest orders of 
men in all human society ordinarily have, whilst they 
have variety of inferior ones besides, common to others 
with themselves; and here I leave the argument |so 
mightily * triumphed in by our ingenious author from 
this identity of names. 

But the reserved forces are still behind, and are to do 
all at last; for \ if this second reason he not thought cogent 
enough, says our learned Enquirer, yet the third and last 
will unquestionably put all out of doubt, and clearly evince 
the sameness of Bishops avd Presbyters a; to order* 

The demonstration is this; It is express 'y said by the 
Ancients, says he, that there were but two distinct Ecclesi- 
astical Orders, Bis'iops and Deacons, or Presbyters and 
Deacons, therefore Presbyters can not be distinct from 
Bishops, for then there would be three. 

The venerable Clemens Romanus is brought to prove 
this, for he says, £ that in countries and cities where the 
Apostles preached, they ordained their first converts for 
Bishops and Deacons over those who should believe. The 
Apostles, it seems then, in their course of planting the 
Churches, ordained but two orders to take care of them. 
• SeeEnq. p. 67, 68. i Knq. lb. p. 68. 

\ Kc7a %wpa$ bv mi vo\iig Krjpvatxov'Jeg KtiQifavov rag cnrapx<iS avrwv us 
erriffKOTrtfc kcli hiciKovus ro)v fxiWovTuv m$ivuv. Clem. Ep. 1, ad Corinth 
p. 54. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C* 183 

In the mean time, what were the ordainers themselves ? 
Were they of no order in the Church, or were they of 
the same order with either of the two they ordained? If 
neither one nor the other be so; then in their time there 
were three orders, it is plain; and how they continued so, 
both from and after them, without splitting any of the 
two, which our Enquirer * fears we do, I think may ap- 
pear from what I have said already. The Apostles had 
a reserved power, we have seen from holy Scripture itself, 
both of government in general, and in special ministerial 
or clerical acts besides, which they did not impart to all 
the Presbyters or Bishops they at first ordained for the 
Churches. If any time could be assigned therefore, or 
any general grant produced, when or whereby it might 
appear, that they conferred or bequeathed those reserved 
powers, so necessary to the Church for ever, to all the 
Presbyters they ever ordained in it; it is but a modest 
question to ask, in what text of Scripture, or in what 
record of the Church, is such an important grant to be 
found? If no such evidence is to be had, as I think the 
ablest advocates for them have produced none; then the 
grants I have mentioned and proved above to particular 
Presidents over many Churches, by their own act and 
deed, even where other Bishops or Presbyters were be- 
fore, as they were indifferently called till then, does infer 
such an evident translation of their own third order, with 
the reserved acts all along peculiar to it, to those partic- 
ular Presidents and the whole succession of them, as, I 
think, no ministers in the Church besides have any shad- 
ow of a charter like it to produce for themselves. For, 
to say, the Apostles had no successors to any ordinary 
and permanent prerogative of theirs, is to contradict all 
»Enq. p. 69. 



184 AN GSiaiNAL DRAUGHT OF 

antiquity barefaced; and it is plainly no less, to say, the 
primitive fathers owned any ministers in the Church to 
be such, besides those they peculiarly called Bishops af- 
ter them; and therefore their reserved ordinary powers 
of government, ordination, confirmation, censure, and 
the rest, did continue their third order in the Churcfi, in 
those Episcopal successors of theirs. And what St. Cle- 
mens sa}^s, is far from being inconsistent with this; for 
when he tells us, the Apostles ordained Bishops and Dea- 
cons, or Presbyters and Deacons, to take care of the 
respective flocks, which either were or should be farther 
provided for them; he very well knew the Apostles who 
ordained them were a superior order to them; and there- 
fore his words have no respect to the number of orders in 
the Church, for wnich they are here produced; nor in- 
deed did the argument he was upon require they should; 
his only business was to awe the mutinous Corinthians, 
from rebelling against the Presbyters of the Church, be- 
cause they were of Apostolical institution, and upon that 
account as much of God's appointment, as the tribe of 
Levi were for the sacred ministry of the Jewish Church, 
which is therefore so particularly described in all the 
orders and offices of it, and so * closely applied to the 
Christian dispensation immediately upon it, that an im- 
partial reader would rather infer, that three orders might 
rationally be concluded, as well in one as the other, than 
imagine that Clemens had the least thought of no more 
than two orders in either. 

*T» yap apx ts pi thai ^ulvpyicu Se&optvai tM xai tois hpevmv ihiosb Toroi 
vpoftraiclai kou Aivirais iSiai SiaKovtat ntlKUvJaC b XaiKog av6p'(avos rots Xaacois 
vpofaynaeiv fcforai . Erases tyxwv, a&eXfoi. tv rw iSm ray pal i wxapirii]* 
Qua tv ayaBn cwei&nni, pv -rcapsicSaivuv tov wpifffievov ra$ Xsflypyias av'Ji 
taKova » ci[xvoWt> Clem. Ep. ad Cor. 1, p. 55, Edi. Patr. Junii, 
Own. 1633. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 185 

Especially, if two things be considered. 1st, that 
Clemens himself, who wrote this, was undoubtedly such 
a single successor, as we have been speaking of, set over 
all other Ecclesiastics in the Church of Rome. And, 
2d, That the Presbyters here insulted at Corinth, were 
many in number in that single Church alone, who could 
not therefore be of the same kind, or order, as I have 
shewn, with Polycarp or Clemens himself, whereof that 
there was but one only in a Church, is too noted a truth, 
to need any proof of it. 

One word to our Enquirer's closing dilemma here, and 
I will proceed. To what end, says he, should Clemens 
exhort the schismatical Corinthians to obey their Presbyters^ 
from the consideration of the Apostles' ordination of Bish- 
ops, if their Presbyters had not been Bishops? I answer 
to a very good end, because the two names were indiffer- 
ently used so long as Clemens lived, and without any 
influence upon the far different powers inherent in one of 
them, when the name of Bishop came to be appropriated 
to him, which * our Enquirer imputes to St. Ignatius as 
the first author of it, and places it in the beginning of the 
second century; and that was not before, but indeed very 
soon after the martyrdom of Clemens, which the f Church 
chronology places in the last year of century the first. 

Irenseus is t quoted next, to strengthen this evidence 
of Clemens Romanus, for two orders oaly in the Church. 

The force of his authority, from one end to the other, 
lies in this single point, that he calls Bishops by the name 
of Presbyters, and (which need not be wondered at after 
that) he calls their orders, the orders of a Presbyter too. 

* Enq. p. 65. 

f See Cave's Chron. Tables of the three first Centuries. 

| Enq. p. 71, 



186 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

This language our learned Enquirer, I doubt not, will 
readily own is very rare in Irenssus' time, and in his own 
works too; but there is little to be gathered from it, to 
the purpose it is brought for here, if we consider these 
few things. 

1st, The caution this venerable Bishop used, to* let us 
know who he meant. In the entrance of the discourse 
he describes them thus : * You must obey the Presbyters 
of the Church; those, I mean, who have a succession from 
tie Apostles, as I shelved you before, who with the succes- 
sion of their Episcopacy, have the sure gift of truth ac- 
cording to the good pleasure of the father. 

Now what Ireneeus shewed us before, was this, We 
can reckon up, says he, 1. 3. c. 3., those who were insti- 
tuted Bishops in the Churches by the Apostles themselves, 
— to whom they committed the very Churches themselves 
also; — left them their successors, delivering up to them their 
own proper place of mastership or prerogative in them. 

The persons here meant, are clearly enough described 
we see, and the Enquirer agrees with us, that they were 
Bishops in the sense of the Church at that time; but he 
did not like to give us this special evidence, which Ire. 
naeus himself does, of their being so, because it contains 
such broad marks of more than ordinary prerogatives, 
conferred by the Apostles upon this order of men, above 
the common Presbyters in the Church, by appointing 
them their peculiar successors over it, and delivering up 
the whole Church itself to their single care alone, as, 
though the singularity of their commission and powers, 

*Eis qui in Eeclesia sint presb}rt.eris otmrlire oportet. His qui sue • 
eessionem habent ab Apostolis, sicut ostendiinus., qui cum Episcopatus 
eudcessione charisma veiitalis certum^ secundum placitum patris accep- 
erunt. Iren. !. 4, c . 43. p . 332. Edit, Luiet, Paris 1675 . 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. &C. 187 

would look a little like another order from the rest; nnd 
therefore he would not begin his quotation here, but in 
general tells us, that they were surely Bishops, which 
Irenaeus was speaking of, and then, from three lesser cir- 
cumstances in the account of them, would assure us, thej 
were of no higher an order than any common Presbyten 
were. 

The first circumstance was this, that they were called 
ly the name of Presbyters, as well as the others. 

To which I answer, that it very well might be so, and 
not the least proof of an equal order in that. The argu- 
ment from names, as I am forced to observe again, doe* 
not lie here; for though the name of Presbyter did by 
degrees become the peculiar title of the second order in 
the Church, upon occasion of the name of Bishop being 
solely appropriated to the first; yet that was not a ne- 
cessary consequence of it, nor the immediate business of 
the Church to make it so; it was but one Ecclesiastical 
officer only, and that the chief of all, who came with 
such extraordinary commission from the Apostles to pre* 
side over them, as I have shewn you before, which they 
wanted a peculiar and distinguishing title for; and accord* 
ingly fixed that of Bishop upon him. So that the name 
of Presbyter, which had been common to all the ministers 
of the Church before, even up to the highest order of the 
Apostles themselves, and had been a term of dignity and 
honor in the Church of God among the Jews, by long 
prescription there; and in respect to the venerable age, 
which it naturally signified, might by any father of the 
Church be attributed to a Bishop still, especially if they 
fixed such a note of discrimination upon it, as Irenaene 
does here; and no fear of derogation to the" Bishop** 
•haracter in it, and much less of levelling him to the 



188 AS ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

lowest order that should be called by that name. A 
Bishop therefore might be called a Presbyter then, though 
it was rarely so, and but for a short time, but a Presbyter 
as distinguished from him, since the Apostolical age ex- 
pired, had the name of Bishop no longer attributed to 
him in the language of the Catholic Church. 

Since Irenseus' Bishops, then, were still the same as 
their predecessors were, which the Apostles constituted 
at the first, and such as the Church then owned for Bish- 
ops, notwithstanding the name of Presbyter was applied 
to them, what farther lessening of them could it be, to 
express their order by an order of the same name too 
Which is the second circumstance in IrennusVwords? 
that our learned author so mightily insists upon? Such 
as the persons were, such as was their order to be sure 
If these Presbyters, then, by na : e, were genuine Bishops 
in the nature and character of them; it follows, that the 
order of Presbyter, as applied to them, was such a Bish- 
op's order also. It is hard, I know, to allow of any other 
possible notion, either of words or things, where time im- 
memorial has fastened one before; and therefore the 
phrase of Presbyter } s Order, to men in our age, can 
scarce ever be thought in any author to signify more or 
less than just what we understand by it now. But if things 
may take place instead of words and sounds with us, I 
think it is clear in this quotation, that the Orders of a 
Presbyter here spoken of, are such as the Apostle's proper 
successors had in the sense and practice of the Primitive 
Church. Irend us declares himself to speak such, and I 
have shewn what prerogatives such Presbyters original. 
\j had, not only of ruling power but of several clerical 
acts too, not common to all the rest; and our Enquirer 
himself assures us, that a Presbyter promoted to such ft 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 189 

Bishop's Chair, was first to receive imposition of hands 
from all the Provincial Bishops, in the age lrenseus lived 
in. Now such singular acts of Ecclesiastical power 
conferred upon a common Presbyter, who had them not 
before, and by such a solemn Apostolical rite as that 
was, which the ancients called ordination, in as plain 
and express terms, as they did in the act of ordaining 
Presbyters or Deacons. This, I own, is what I under- 
stand by the Bishop's supreme order in the Church; and 
Irenseus, as his language all along imports, meant noth- 
ing less by it here, though the name of Presbyter, which 
in several respects suited every order in the Church, was 
peculiarly affixed to him. 

And as to the text of Isaiah Ix. 17. applied here, as 
it was in Clemens Romanus before, I shall remark only 
thus much; that * Clemens's o*ld translation of the place 
answered his own language about the Apostles ordaining 
Bishops and Deacons in the Church; for so his Greek 
Bible, it seems, had rendered it in the copies of his time, 
and by that authority he made the names to be awful and 
venerable to the Corinthians, as he was endeavoring to 
do. But Ireneeus here, who was speaking of Supreme 
Presbyters only, applied the text, as it is in our present 
translation of the f LXX. whereby they are rendered 
by the names of Princes and Bishops; so that both words 
answered the argument he was upon, which was to en- 
join obedience to the true Supreme Governors of any one 
Catholic Church; and neither in one place nor the other, 
does it any way prove, that either of the Fathers under- 

* Clemens' copy rendered, Isa, lx. 17, thus: Kalawao) tsg i-MGKoirea 
avjijiv ti$ SiicaioGvvriv /ecu tug Sicucovug clvtlov iv ttiztu. 

t Irenseus used the LXX. *vhich renders it thus : Awo-w r;<r Apxovras at 

tf $ipiJVT) Kdl TUG fiTlGKOTTUG GH IV SlKCUO&VVr]. 

17 



00 AN ORIGINAL BEAUGHT OF 

stood but two orders only in the Church; as I conceive 
may now appear by what I have observed from them. 

Clemens Alexandrinus, as the last evidence, is to clear 
all; two passages to that purpose are quoted from him. 
I will shew the occasion of both, that we may judge the 
better what the Holy Father probably meant by them. 

Clemens was setting forth the utmost advancement of a 
perfect Christian under the title of a complete and true 
Gnostick. * He represents him as master of all his pas- 
sions, and then improving in good works till he becomes 
equal to an Angel here; and being bright and shining as 
the Sun, hastens on through his righleom knowledge, and 
the love of God to a Holy Mansion, as the Apostles did be- 
fore him. And, on this occasion, tells us farther, that f 
every one who exercised himself in the commandments 
of the Lord, and lived as a perfect Gnostick according to 
the Gospel, might be admitted into the Apostolic roll: 
that is, undoubtedly, in his Seraphic sense of it, be as fair 
a candidate for perfection of happiness hereafter, as an 
Apostle himself could be, if he was equal tohim in Gnos- 
tic wisdom -and holiness here; characters and orders of 
men, from the highest to the lowest of them in the 
Church, in this view of them, making but little difference 
in the case. And to explain himself farther in the point, 
he goes on in these words; which our Enquirer quotes 
for his use, he is a Presbyter in the Church indeed, says 

^MilpLOiiraBrjaas ra irpura Kai ug avadziav jjiE^TTjaag avlrjcac rt tig ivaotav 
TtvutfiKris riXuorrpog i<xayye\og fxzv tvlavQa. Quliivog Sz rjSrj Kai (ag rj'Xtof 
\apirwv cttbvSu nri rrjv ayiav ftovyv, KaQairip 01 airogoXoi. Edition Oxon. 
Strom. 1. 6, p, 792. 

t E&fiv lv Kai wv iraig Kvptaxalg zvavKticrav'Jag raig zv7o\dig, Kaja r» 
Ivayyihiov riXuwg fiiwcav'JaG kcu. Troy^iK^g us rriv iKkoyrjv twv ano?o\t*r 
tfypafrjvai — p. 793. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 10^ 

he, * and a true Deacon of the will of God, if he does, 
and teaches, the things of the Lord; not ordained of men, 
or therefore thought a righteous person, because made a 
Presbyter, but because* righteous, therefore chosen into 
the Presbytery; and although he be not honored with the 
first seat here on earth, yet shall hereafter sit down on 
that twenty four thrones, judging the people, as St. John 
says in the Revelations. The sense of this whole specu- 
lation, I think, appears plainly to be this; that in respect 
of true intrinsic excellency here, and of a title to perfect 
bliss and happiness hereafter, neither Apostle, Presbyter, 
Deacon or Layman, have any great advantage of one 
another, by any outward character, title or difference of 
order they may have below, but purely as they excel one 
another in Christian virtue, divine knowledge, wisdom 
and goodness; and so are more perfect Christian Gnos- 
ticks than the rest. And therefore if a Presbyter, in par- 
ticular, be such a qualified saint as this, though he be 
not honored with the first seat here; that is, says he, 
with as high a seat as any I have named to you now, 
which in plain connexion with the whole argument, is 
with an Apostolical chair in the Church, (for an Apostle 
was one of the orders, in his comparison, amongst the 
rest,) yet he shall sit in the twenty four Thrones, judging 
the people, as St. John speaks in the Revelation; as if he 
had directly said, though he may not sit in a Bishop's 
place, whose See Tertullian, cotemporary with Clemens, 
calls an Apostolical Chair; and the Church of that age, 

* Ot>7os Ttpea&v'Jepot; e^i ra> ov)t rrjg ZKKXrjinas kcu SiaKovog aXrjBrjg rrjs rt 
0jy fi{jA7]as(j)Si'£av Troirj kul Si5a<K7] ra ra Kvpty, y/c ut' avdpu>iru)v x il P°l bvupwoS) 
«<$' on TtpegSv^Jipag dacaios voiufynivos aXX' oil SiKaios tv TrpegBvlipua KaJaXiy- 
opavos' nav EvJavOa an yqs Trp^loKxOiSpia jxtj ti^yiBt] iv rot ukoci kcli nacapffi 
KaOcSeilai Opovois rovXaov Kpivuv, us <j>rj<nv &v rn airoKaXv-^zi lu&vvrtf. StTQ* 

1. 6, p. 792, 



192 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

I have proved above, acknowledged Bishops to be their 
proper successors, yet he shall sit, says St. Clemens, at 
the last day, among the chiefest saints, to judge the 
world with Christ; and how the mentioning of a first 
chair of a Presbytery, in the sense wherein this Holy 
Father names it here, should imply, that every Presbyter 
who sat in the Presbytery also, should be of equal order 
with him who sat the first and highest in it, by this evi- 
dence of Clemens for it, I leave now to the reader's judg- 
ment on the place. 

But this venerable Father affords our Enquirer a far- 
ther testimony for his cause; which though some men 
think, as he * observes himself, to be more against 
him, yet he roundly affirms, it is evidently on his side. 
Clemens mentions, says he, advancements or processes, as 
he renders them, of Bishops, Presbyters and Deacons. 
"But "\ these are evidently meat! t, says our discerning author, 
only of degree, and there are but two orders between them 
all. For Clemens immediately adds, says he * that those 
offices are an imitation of the Angelic glory, and of that 
dispensation, which, as the Scriptures say, they wait for. 
who treading in the steps of the Apostles, live in the per- 
fection of Evangelical righteousness-, for these, the Apos- 
tle writes, shall he taken up into the clouds, 1 Thes. iv. 17. 
and there first as Beacons attend, and then according to 
*SeeEnq. p. 72- 

t lipoKonai iiriuKOTiwv irpzs§vTgpu)v diaicovojv. Strom at. 6. 

* yiiprjpara oipaC Ayye\iK%s 8o&s iJaicuvris rrjg biKovopiag Tvyxavsav, 
nv avajjiiveiv (paciv ai ypadat rug kclt ix v °S rCOv a~oso\u)v tv teXskahjii 
StKaioavvtjs Kara to 'E.vayyiXiov (3&Giu)icoras tv v&<pi\ais tutus apQivras^ ypaoti 
b airos'oXog, biaKovqctiv piv to. irpuJTa cmtra EyKaTaXaynvai to) irpecSvTepio) 
Kara irpoK07rrjv So^rjg bo^a yap tiofys av adept i ayeis ay eisreXsiov av&pa avfrau)- 
ff(v. Id. ib. 



THK PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 193 

the process, or next station of glory, be admitted into the 
Presbytery, for glory differs from glory, till they increase 
to a peffeci man- 

Hence he argues, that since the scriptures mention but 
two orders of Angels, viz: Arch-angels and Angels; and 
the stations of glorified saints are here explained by being 
Deacons awhile, and then taken in;o the Presbytery, and 
so, as he says, their glory perfected. It therefore ap- 
pears, that the Holy Father meant his Bishops, Presby- 
ters, and Deacons, to have but two orders amongst them. 

This is his argument faithfully stated, arid I think to 
the full. Upon which I take leave to make these few 
observations. 

1st. That since Deacons and Presbyters, which are 
two of Clemen's three progressions in the Church, 
have unquestionably a distinct order from one another, 
and yet but one common word is used to express those 
two progressions, and that of the third together with 
them; it is a forced and unwarrantable construction, I 
conceive of the venerable Father's phrase, to make him 
mean a difference of order between two of these progres. 
sions, and no difference at all in the third. For that a 
difference of order was to be understood amongst these 
progressions in general, is clear from our Enquirer's ap- 
plication of them, who insists upon it, that they were an 
imitation of the Archangels and Angels Orders. So that 
not only three progresssions must here be taken to be a 
natural pattern and imitation of two only in Heaven 
above; but one of the three also, who had no distinct or- 
der, but what was common to another, must help to make 
up the true representation of the State of Angels and 
Archangels, who had each of them a very distinct and 
different order to themselves. And this will, appear the 
17* 



194 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OT 

harder construction of Clemen's words still, if we ob- 
serve, that in this very quotation itself, when he express- 
es the two orders of glorified saints afterwards, by their 
advancing from the order of Deacon-saints first, to that 
of glorified Presbyters at last; upon which the force of 
this! argument depends, he uses the * same numerical 
word for it, it is a UpoKo^ Sdfa, which makes the higher 
order of Saints or Angels there; and why must not this 
npoKow* of Bishops then, in his language, be thought to do 
as much for them, if the relatum and correlatum in the; 
comparison duly answer one another; I conceive it must 
be so. But, 

2nd. What warrantable grounds can we have to deter- 
mine the number of the o . ders of Angels and Arch-angels 
in the Holy Scriptures? St. Augustin durst not do it; but 
thought a f cautious ignorance less to be blamed, than a rash 
presumption in this very case, and was so humble as to 
own it in himself. That there are thrones, and Domin- 
ions, and Principalities, and powers, in the heavenly par- 
ade above, says he, I steadfastly believe; and it is my un- 
doubted faith, that there is a difference hetwen them; hut 
what that difference is, I know not, nor do I think that igno- 
rance is any hurt to me. He seemed to be mindful of St. 
Paul's awful hint, not to intrude into things he saio not. 
The learned Grotius, from the common opinion of the 
Jews, affirms somewhat more of them, and says, £ they 

* 'Ka]a oipoKowjv So^ag zyKaraXayvvai ru) 7r'p£a8v"j 'aw . Slromat. 6. 

f Magis in istis temerari prsesumptio.quam cauta ignoratio culpanrfa 
videatur.— Esse itaq; sedes, dominationes, principals, potestates, in 
coeleslibus apparatibus firmissime credo, et differre inter se aliquid 

indubitata fide terieo sed quid inter se diffeiant, nescio;' JVec ea 

sane ignorantia periclitari me puto. August, hb. ad Oro?. cap. II 
fol. 141, intei opera, Tom. 6. Paris 1555. 

^Nomina sublimissimarum classium angel : carum, frequentia apud 
Uebrseos. Grot, in Ephes 1. 21. inter opera, Tom. 3, p. 520. Lend.. 1679. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 195 

were names of the sublimest classes of Angels, familiarly 
taken to be such by that ancient Church of God; which 
is little less than attributing so many orders to them. 
Nor do I apprehend, indeed, that the general division 
into Archangels and Angels, supposing our Revelation 
of them to be full and entire, does any more conclude 
their orders to be but strictly two, than the division of 
English subjects into Peers and Commoners, is an evident 
proof that there are but two orders of subjects in this 
Kingdom. And to draw proofs for any part of the Chris 
tian dispensation from so precarious an hypothesis as 
this, to say the best of it, is to argue in the dark. Clem- 
ens himself gave but little occasion to be so represent- 
ed; for he does not so much as name the orders of Angels* 
but only mentions the Angelical glory in this quotation; 
and immediately joins it with the glory of human saints 
in heaven, as making both of them the subject of his com- 
parison; and that he assigned a threefold state of glory 
to them, will appear by the last observation I shall make; 
which is this: 

3d, That when Clemens advanced his glorified saints 
from the inferior state of Deacons into the Presbytery 
afterwards, he did not so consummate their bliss there* 
as our Enquirer positively does; but adds, that glory dif- 
fers from glory, as the quotation owns, till they increase 
into a perfect man. And that this increasing into a per- 
fect man was a farther advancem nt than that of his Dea- 
con and Presbyter saints before, is not only evident by 
what he adds immediately upon it, viz. * Thai such as 
those rest in the holy mount of God, in the uppermost 
Church, where the philosophers of God do meet together, 

• AxpiS av ft ? TiXuov avdpo au|??crto(nV 0/ tolhtol — Kajavavoyoiv tv opet 
myiu) 0*2, tt\ avuflaru cKKXrjina, icaO' r,v ol <pi\oao<poi avvayorat r? Qtu. Stio,, 
6, p. 793. 



196 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

so his Platonic phrase is, and a great deal more of that 
superlative character of them; but, I think, is undenia- 
bly clear, at his summing up this whole argument a leaf 
or two after, in these^ex press words: * You see, says he, 
what Wisdom says of these Gnostics: And, in proportion 
to this, there ars different mansions, according to the digni- 
ty of believers. Solomon says, a select grace oj faith 
shall be given to him, and a more delightsome lot in the 
temple of the Lord. This comparative shews there are 
inferior ones in God's temple, which is the Universal 
Church; and it gives us 1 1 understand, there is a superla- 
tive one too, where the Lord is. • These three elect man- 
sions are signified by the numbers in the gospel, of thirty, 
sixty, and an hundred fold. And the perfect inheritance 
is theirs, who attain to the perfect man, according to the 
image of the Lord. 

By this clear evidence of the venerable father's sense, 
I conceive he now appears consistent with himself, and 
that the three orders in the Church are so far from heius 
lost by the parallel, that it could not be made out without 
them; and I should think I very unfairly represented 
him, if I contracted them into two. 

Between these two authorities of Clemens, for only 
two orders in the Church, t ! ie f Enquiry describes the 
form of session in the ancient Presbytery; which I should 

* Opas ola irepi t(ov rV^s't/cwv <$' aXeyerai n ao^ia' avaXoyws apa mi fxovai 
vouciXai tear* a%)a ro)v -m^ivaav^iov^ 'AvJikci SoXo^wj/, SoQijaerat yap avra 
« %apis tKXiKTn tcai icXrjpos ev van) Kvpw dvjjiypzs-epos. To cvyKpi'Jnrdv yap 
isiKWSi piv ra vjroSt6r]fco']a iv ru> vaw rs QiS ds i<f]iv fj nava tK>c\r)(na arcoXinrtt 
it tvvotiv koli to VTrtpOiJiicuv, ivQa b Kvpios e<?iv. Tavras ikXcktgls wa$ rat 
rpas [novas ot ev rw RvayyeXia) apiOpioi aivicaovjai, b rpiaKovJa, nai b e^Kov^Ja, 
Mat b tuajov* koi h p.tv reXeia KA^ovo/ua riav us avSpa rtXciov a<piKvv{i€V<o? y 
kot' eticova ra Kvpoiu. lb. 797. 
t Enq. p . 74. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &.C. 197 

pass over without any controversy about it, but that he 
tells us there, that St. Cyprian calls the Presbyters his 
colleagues in the session. This obliged me to consider 
his authority for it, because I had appropriated that title 
to Bishops only, by which they spoke of one another; 
and had accordingly * argued, as you may remember, 
for their prerogatives upon it. I presumed he had found 
some singular passage in St. Cyprian, to warrant what 
he had said. The place he quotes for it, is in his 28th 
Epistle, § 2. Edit. Pame). or Ep. 84. Edit. Oxon. I 
carefully perused the whole Epistle, and found St. Cy- 
prian mentioning his colleagues four times in it. 1st, He 
commends his Presbyters and Deacons, to whom he 
writes, for not cot Pr 'sbyierand Dea- 

con of Didda, as Ids colleagues f had advised them. — 
Were these colleague? his own Presbyters, do we imagine,. 
by whose advice they themselves acted so agreeably to 
his mind ? 2d, lie takes notice to his Presbyters, that 
they had acquainted him by letter, how the said Presby- 
ter of Didda and his Deacon had been admonished again 
and again by his . and yet ± went on in their 

fault. Did the Presbyters mean themselves, by those 
colleagues, in their letter to Cyprian? Why not admon. 
ished by ns? when the letter was their own, and why not 
by you, in St. Cyprian's again to them? but no remark can 
make it so plain, as the Epistle itself does; yet I must go 
on to the place peculiarly quoted still. 3d, Then, he or- 
ders his Presbyters and Deacons to read his letters to his 

* Page 145. supra. 

i Consilio collegarum meorum — censulstis non comrminicandum. 
Cypr. Ep. 34. Edit, Oxon. 

J Semel atq; iterum, secundum quod mihi scripsisti?, a collegis meis 
moniti; pertiBaciter pcrslilerunt. lb, 



108 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

* colleagues also, if there were any there, or happened to 
come thither. Strange sense, if he meant such persons as 
he wrote to, and questioned whether any of them were 
there. Thus far I think his colleagues and Presbyters 
were somewhat different persons with him; and do we 
think he used the same term a fourth time after this, and 
meant quite another thing by it? In the last place then, 
he acquaints his Presbyters and Deacons, what should be 
done in the case of two sub-Deacons and an Acolyth, 
which they consulted him about; and tells them, that 
many of his own Clergy were yet absent, and he would 
not privately decide that cause, which was likely to be a 
standing precedent concerning ministers of the Church, 
and therefore ought to be examined, f not only together 
with his colleagues, hut ivith all his people also; letting 
them plainly know, that the hearing of that cause should 
be as public as the coicern was, and not only he, and his 
own Clergy to whom he wrote, but his colleagues also, 
and even his own people too should be present at it; where 
by his colleagues, surely he meant the same persons, as 
he had three times before, you see, in the same letter, 
that is some Bishops of the province, whereof he was 
metropolitan; as the solemnity of the case did manifestly 
invite him to call in their assistance, and require their 
presence, according to his account of it. And this con- 
firms me more still, that colleague was unquestionably a 
term appropriated to fellow -Bishops only, in St. Cy- 
prian's language; since the fairest instance so inquisitive 

*Legile has easdem literas et collegis meis, si qui aut pnesentes fue- 
rint, aut superveuerint. Cyp. Ep. 34. Edit, Oxon. 

I- Hasc singuloium tractanda sit et limanda plenius latio, non tantum 
cum collegis meis, sed et cum plebe universa, expensa enim moderatio- 
ne libranda et pernuncianda res est, quae in posterum circa ministroa 
ecclesia? constituat exernplum, lb. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 199 

an author could single out to disprove it, appears to fall 
in with it too. 

I have now considered, and too particularly, I am 
afraid, the tired reader will think, the three general ar- 
guments for equality of orders in the Bishops and Presby- 
ters of the Church, with every single authority, I think, 
which the ingenious Enquirer has offered for the proof of 
it; and if it still appears, that the Presbyters could do 
every clerical act which the Bishop could do, by virtue of 
their inherent powers alone, without his authority for it; 
that their different powers made no difference of orders 
in them; that the identity, and sameness of name, proved 
them to be the same with one another; and that the prim- 
itive fathers did expressly own and declare that there 
were but two orders in the Church. It is no more than 
that learned author foretold, would surely be the effect 
of such a vain attempt as this. * For though he humbly 
questioned for a while, whether his premises were fully 
proved or no; yet he concluded soon, that upon the nar- 
rowest enquiry he could make, they could not be evinced. 
I have no opinion of all that I have said, any farther than 
of the sincerity of it, and that it keeps me unavoidably, 
through the evidence of truth I verily think to be in it* 
from consenting to any one of the arguments he offers 
for his cause. What others may think of it, I leave only 
to God and themselves; having as unfeigned and hearty 
a concern (I may say it before Him, who knows my 
thoughts long before-hand) as that affectionate author 
professes to have for the unhappy divisions this fatal 
controversy causes in the Church. 

The close of this chapter is an innocent speculation 
about the reason of the number of Presbyters in the 
+ See Enq. p. 75. 



200 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

primitive Churches, and of the time when their office 
began. The scheme required something of this, since a 
Diocese was allowed by it to have no more than a single 
congregation for three hundred vears together: and read- 
ing of forty or fifty Presbyters in one, the question might 
be asked, he pretty well foresaw, what need there should 
be of them all? He answers therefore, They were partly 
as Curates are to our Rectors now, though more neces- 
sary ones, says he, upon account of the variety of acci- 
dents then, and of the uncertainty of the times; and be- 
cause the number might be a little surprising still, he 
farther makes his Presbyters to be young pupils to his 
parochial Bishops, and in a state of education under them, 
to be fit to succeed them in time. This harmless thought, 
since it is pressed upon us with no authority of fathers, 
councils, or historians, to give the reader much trouble 
about it, shall be left undisturbed by me; and I will con* 
elude this chapter, as the Enquiry does, with a short re- 
flection upon a remarkable account which Clemens Alex- 
andrinus gives us of St. John the Apostle. * He went, 
upon 'request, t ing vh , says Clemens, 

in some places to c others, to plant 

whole Churches ; a\ to ordain such into 

the number of the Cle-'g rrfrcd to Mm by the 

Holy Ghost. Here is a sacred example of primitive 
Bishops indeed, inst e may truly say, by the Ho- 

ly Ghost itself; for who assigned tl e persons? It was that 
Holy Spirit, you see, ii A quotation, and inducted by an 
Apostle, for so St. John p ed tl em in their Churches; 
and if our learned aut or-raei *1 such an institution and 
induction a.8 this, derive*! from his original upon all their 
successors in the like station in the Church, we should 
• F«r Note see next page. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 201 

differ but little about his words, when he calls the Bish- 
op::, the presented, instituted, and inducted ministers of 
his Diocesan Parishes. [Enq. p. 57.] But then the obli- 
gation of the Presbyters, nut to invade these Bishops' 
places, would have something more in it, than he thinks 
fit to allow; for he will have it, that for pence, or unity, 
or order sake, they could not or icould not do it, as if it 
were mere gentleness, or love of peace in them, which 
withheld them from invading a Bishop's function, being 
as fully qualified for it as the Bishops themselves. Where- 
as here is an eminent superior by God's institution or- 
dained to preside over them; and as I have proved above, 
with additional clerical powers too, which were never 
imparted to them. And as the Bishops were thus Apostol- 
icaliy settled at the first, so the orders of Presbyters and 
Deacons, as distinct from them here, had the like institu- 
tion and induction into their respective places in the 
Churches, so early as St. John's time. For our Enquirer 
tells us, he believes, that by the word Clergy, in the last 
clause of this quotation, both those orders most probably 
should be understood. So that a divine right for each of 
them, in the language and acceptation of those times, 
wherein Clemens and E use hi us lived, is as clearly af- 
firmed here, as the venerable Clemens, in so few words, 
could possibly, have said it, 

* l A~7]St vcpaKa\xfxsvos Kai tiri ra -riXr^LOxupa tuv iQruv. Qtts ptv itiv- 

ko~3S) Ka~ja<p]<juv, — 07ry be okas ekicXqcrtas Gpp.com>, Ory Ss eveyi rxva 

xXrjpwcurv ruv vtto ra zvivpa~jos <rrjp.aivop.ivuv. Tig b -hi<ja)£. C. ult. and 
Euseb. 1. 3, c.23. 

18 



202 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

CHAP. V, 

The fifth chapter begins with the order and office of 
Deacons; and it is a comfort to hear * there is no great 
controversy about them. I hope I shall occasion none, by 
barely using the learned Vossius' authority for restoring 
& negative particle to a short clause quoted out of St. Ig- 
natius, here. The Enquiry leaves it out, as some copies 
had done before, and by that means makes that venerablo 
father call this third order in the Church, f The Deacons 
of meats awl cups; J whereas it is plain, St. Ignatius' in. 
tention was to remove that meaner character from them, 
and give them their proper title of servants, or ministers, 
of the Church of God; in contradistinction to it, and im- 
mediately thereupon he requires all to reverence them 
accordingly. The nature of the period itself, and the 
holy father's ordinary notion of the Deacons, agree with 
this reading. The rest upon this head I willingly leave 
as I find it, and wish I could have done the like to all 
that is gone before. 

Sub-Deacons are briefly considered next; not for any 
thing this learned author thought material to say about 
them, but purely, one would think, to give one plausible 
turn more to what he seems to have so much at heart, 
The equality of Bishops and Presbyters' orders. For all 
he observes of them is this, that the orders of Deacons 
and sub-Deacons, in his || opinion of them, were probably 
the same; the one intended only to assist the other in the 
same Ecclesiastical offices, common to them both, that 

♦Enq.p. 79. 

t Bpta^ajiav kui iroTjwv ttcrt liaxovoi, Enq. p. 80. 

i Ov yap Ppupajuv Kai vol&v uai Skxkovoi, aAA 1 SKkXtjaiag Gf3 vnTjpe'Jat — 
tern/fes t/lpttrtsBucav rug diaicovovs. Ignat. Ep. ad Trail, p. 48, Edit. 
Vo^sii sccuuda Lond. 16S0. || Enq. p. 81. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 203 

so the account he gave of the like equality between Bish- 
ops and Presbyters might pass the better for being so 
directly parallel to these. Now all he could hope for 
from hence, amounts to no more than what uncertainty 
and supposition could afford him; for he concludes it 
doubtful, after all, whether Deacons and sub-Deacons' 
orders were the same, and * supposes it only upon this 
presumption, that in no Church whatsoever it was usual 
to have more than seven Deacons, because of the original 
number instituted by the Apostles; and therefore sub-Dea- 
cons were ordained to discharge their necessary ministra- 
tions for them in the greater and more numerous Church- 
es. But that a sub-Deacon could not discharge tho 
necessary ministrations of a Deacon, I think is plain 
enough, from what our learned author himself knows, 
and f owns, a Deacon did in the primitive Church; that 
is, assist in the celebration of the eucharist, preach, and 
baptize- for what monument of antiquity, ever affirmed 
the sub-Deacons, could do all this ? So far from that, 
that the council of Laodicea, which the learned Dr. 
Cave observes was peculiarly held to revive the discip- 
line of the primitive Church, assures us,, ij: sub-Deacons 
ivere not suffered to have any place in the Diaconicum, [or 
sacred apartment of the Deacons] || nor so much as totouch 
the holy ves els. § That they might not ivear the sacred 
fascia, or linnen wreath, called the orarium, appointed for 
the Deacon's qfee; and for this very reason, as Zonaras 

*Enq. p. 81. 

t Enq. p. 80. 

i In eo precipue id agebatuY, ut collapsa primitivse ecclesise discip- 
lina lefarciretur. Hist. Liter. Part. 2. p. 122. Edit. Lond. 1698. 

[j Ov Stt bxr}pzra$ 'iyj.iv xtyav iv ru 8ig.kovik<x>, kcu a-lesQai hpwv GKivw* 
Cone. Land. Can. 21. 

*& Oy <$a vxnpz7<]v wpaptw dzpc iVt lb. Can. 23, 



204 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

notes upon it, * because every sacred order had their 'pecu- 
liar habit. That sub-Deacons ministered to, and not for 
the Deacons, is observed by the inquisitive *j* Suicer, from 
no less authority than the first great council of Nice. 
All this does little less than contradict the hypothesis be- 
fore us, of sub-Deacons being ordained to discharge the 
Deacons' ministrations in their stead; and, one would 
think, were evidence enough to prove their orders to be 
different, unless some authentic ordinal, within our En- 
quirer's period of time, were extant to demonstrate the 
contrary. And lastly, As to the primitive Churches con- 
fining themselves to seven Deacons only, from the exam- 
ple of the first institution in the Acts, I refer the reader 
to the judgment of the sixth general council about it, 
where he will find, in their 16th Canon, ^ that the origi- 
nal precedent in the Acts, did not affect the number or 
office of the Deacons who ministered at the altar of the 
Church. And the testimony of an oecumenical council 
about the sense of the Catholic Church, is of some weight, 
I think, though at a distance from the three first centu- 
ries of it. 

But to pass from this, and all the other antiquated or- 
ders in the primitive Church, I proceed to consider the 
next general head in this chapter; which is, the manner 
of ordaining Presbyters in use amongst them then. 

And, in no point is our learned author more curious 
and particular than in this. He presents us with every 
circumstance of the ancient manner of ordaining Pres- 

* E/cas-o* IJspa Tay(xa]i anovzytp-fjai Kai $o\r) biKeia avju^ &c . Zonar. in 

Can. 

t Suicer in voce hirvp^rjg. Txripelai in Ecc'esia dicuntur subdiaconi, 
qui episcopis, presbyteris, at Diaconis ministrant. Act. Cone. Nic. 1, 

Par. 3, p. 172. 

t Tug Ttpou )^7/i£vyc iir'Ja diaKOVug f.o/ i~i tois y.vrfvpiois Sianovyjxivwv \ap." 

tavaOai, Cone. G, in Trullo. Can. 16. 



fliE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 205 

Syters, in a more exact method than any author who 
lived amongst them, or near those early ages he speaks 
of, ever did; and for that reason, I shall oblige the reader 
with the whole scheme of it, in his own words. 

Whosoever desired to be admitted, says * he, into this 
sacred office, he first proposed himself to the Presbytery 
of the Parish where he dwelt and was to be ordained; 
desiring their consent to his designed intention; praying 
them to confer upon him those holy orders which he craved. 
Now we must suppose, says he, this petition to the whole 
Presbytery, because a Bishop alone could not give those 
holy orders; as is most evident from Cyprian, who assures 
us, that all clerical ordinations were performed by the 
common council cf the whole Presbytery, f Upon this 
application, the Presbytery debated their petition in £ 
their common council, and proceeded to examine, whether 
he had those qualifications and endowments which were 
requisite Jor that sacred office, (viz. these four) his age> 
his condition in the world, his conversation , and his under- 
standing. || If they approved all, they declared him ca- 
pable of the function. Then his name must be propounded 
to the people, thai, if worthy, he might have their testimo- 
ny and attestation ; if unworthy, he might be debarred 
and excluded from orders. If they approved his fitness 
for the office, then followed ordination and imposition of 
hands, usually of the Bishop and Presbyters of their 
Parish, according to 1 Tim. iv. 14. 

Here is a formal abstract, one would verily think, of 
some primitive ordinal or another; though not a syllable 
quoted from any one record, so public, proper, and ne- 

*Enq . p. 83, S4. 

f Comrfluui cjnsilio omnium nostrum . Cyp. Ep. 24. alias 29. Edit. 
©sob, JEr.q. lb. [| Enq. p. -95,96. 

18 * 



206 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

cessary in the case; here is a candidate for holy orders*, 
made an humble supplicant to a whole parochial or dio- 
cesan Presbytery for them, and not a text of Scripture to- 
direct, or one single Canon, so much as of a provincial 
Synod, to require it of them. And lastly, here is a Cath. 
olic practice set forth to us, upon a bare supposition, for 
the learned author himself says no more, that three or 
four words in a particular Bishop's writings, relating 
purely to his own peculiar practice, as we shall see by 
and by, must evidently imply so much. 

This is a singular method, I must needs say, of proving 
the general practice of the Christian Church; and to say 
the most we can of it, amounts only to this, that if the 
excellent St. Cyprian did upon any consideration what- 
soever generally consult his Presbytery, and we may say 
his people too, whensoever he ordained in his Church;- 
then he, and all other Christian Bishops besides, were so 
far obliged, by the constitution of the Catholic Church 
in his time, to do so, that none of them could ordain a 
single Presbyter without them; for upon that holy father's 
account of himself alone, and that in much larger terms 
in the translation, than we find it in his own text, this 
formal scheme of primitive ordinations is drawn. Let 
the reader consult the whole, and he will find it so; — 
though whatever less material quotation intervenes, I 
shall both mention and weigh it too. In the mean time* 
to prove the translation of the present quotation to be 
far wider than the text itself, before we go any farther, 
we need only set one against the other. 

The Enquiry makes St. Cyprian say, that all clerical 
ordination were performed by the common Council of the 
whole Presbytery, implying by his general terms, and the 
application of them here, that he and all other Bishop 8 * 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 



207 



practised so. Whereas the words, all clerical ordinations, 
are neither named, nor so much as implied in that Epis- 
tle, from whence this quotation is taken. The whole 
case there was this: * St. Cyprian had formerly design- 
ed to ordain a certain Lector and Sub-Deacon, by the 
common advice and counsel of his Presbyters and Dea- 
cons; therefore he assures us, says our learned Enquirer, 
that all clerical ordinations were performed, by the com- 
mon council of the whole Presbytery ; for from this very 
place the quotation is taken, f But having occasion, as 
the holy Bishop farther tells them, to make use of sucfr 
clerical officers in the time of his absence from them, he 
lets them know, that he had ordained them there by him- 
self alone, which, by the way, is proof enough that t the 
orders were complete, and valid to all intents and pur- 
poses, without them. It is true, he plainly wishes, as 
his manner was, rather to have had them in council 
with him, and excuses himself for doing it alone; and 
why? ^ Because he had solemnly purposed with himself 
as he tells them in another Epistle, from the time of his 
first promotion to the See, that he would do nothing of his 
own private opinion, without consulting them, or without 
the consent of his people. The only needful enquiry 
here is this: 

Was this resolution of St. Cyprian grounded upon any 
law of God, or the Church, by which he was obliged and 

* Quod jampridemcommtmi connlio omnium nostrum CGsperat, &c 
oportuit me perclericos sciibere. 

j Fecisse me sciatislectorem Saturum et hypodiaconum Optatma.- 
Eb- 29. Edit. Oxon- 

JAprimordio episcopatus mei statuerim nihil sine consilio vestro t 
ei\ sine] plebis consensu mea privatim sententia gerere. Dyp/Ep,.. 
14- ♦ ult. Edit. Oxon. 



208 AN ORIGINAL DKAUGM OF 

bound to do so? or was it by the mere free motion of his 
own discretion and goodness, that he determined so with 
himself? The former would imply Catholic practice and 
duty in the case, if it had been proved; the latter will 
amount to no more, than a personal virtue and prudence 
in the peculiar circumstances of that meek and holy 
Martyr; worthy of all imitation indeed, where times and 
persons suited so properly with it, as they did then. But 
otherwise, obliging unto none. 

That no constitution, law, or canon whatsoever, oblig- 
ed St. Cyprian to it; these following particulars must in- 
cline us to believe. 

1st. That the whole College of Presbyters and Dea- 
eons in the Church of Rome, who were cotemporary 
with the holy Martyr himself, and continually corres- 
ponding with him, give a quite contrary account of it. 
For in the preface of an Epistle to him, they represent 
his practice thus: * Although a good conscience, say they,- 
supported by the vigor of the discipline of the Gospel and 
made a true witness of itself, by the decrees of Heaver?, 
commonly contents itself with appealing to the judgment of 
God alone, and neither couris the prdse, nor fears the 
accusations of another; yet they are vjorthj of double honor 
indeed, ivho, knowing their own conscience, ought of right 
to be judged of God only, yet desire all their actions to be 

* Quanquam bene sibi conscius animus* et evangelic^ discipline 
vigore. subnixus, el verus sibi in decretis crclestibus testis effectus, sole- 
at solo Deo judice effe contentus, nee alterius aut laudes petere aut: 
accusationes psrtimescere ; tamen gen inata sunt laude condigni, qui 
cum conscientiam sciant Deo soli debere se judici, actus tamen suo* 
desiderant etiam ab ipsis suis fratribus comprobari; quod te, frater 
Cypriane, facere non mirum est, qui pro tua verecundia et ingenha 
iiidustria consiliorum tuorum nos non tarn judices voluisti, quam par- 
ticipes in7en;re. Ep, 30 . J 1 . Edit. Oxon. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 209 

tried and approved ly their cum very brethren themselves; 
which we do not uondcr, brother Cyprian, that you do; ivho 
according lo your native modesty and care, are wiling that 
we, the Presbyters and Deacons of another Church, 
should judge, or rather he partners of all your councils iviih 
you. 

This is pretty clear language, and the holy Martyr 

himself says little less, when he speaks out to the lapsed 

brethren of his own Diocese, that * the Church was con- 

sLiiu'cd upon Bishops, and every act of it was to be govern* 

ed by them-, and his stated sense, repeated over and over 

again, throughout his whole works, is this, *j* That every 

Bishop had the ordering and disposing of his own act in 

the adminis '.ration of the Church, and was accountable for 

*4& God a 1 one. The learned Dr. % Cave understood this in 

\ue - ,^ e sense that the Roman Presbyters and Deacons 

-jrefore speaks of this holy Martyr's practice 

111 1 'udici£ ua g e wun tnem 5 I! h e was so modest, 

vrt&tike Chtithor, that in ail great transactions 

COn ikd his flock, ch.alirays consulted with his Col- 

'ilioni the counsel <> y mined not to adjudge ant; 

f sfJuU modesty', **» Clergy and the pcople . 

■a * A to act no other- 

wise. » ul > 

Pl ,ucce*to«ium vices ■eptecop- 
♦ Per temporum el ^ , epis copos fe 

&**» -«3oec,n, , t E^^^ j0siios &ubcniswt . ^ 

omnisaciuseccles* pe 

"o i, 1 EdH. OJCOfl. . Tr nUc0P us rationei.. 

* >3, ' •, Pt divkit uitusqwsq; ^uc°V 

1 u\ <ui Domino redo.tmus. Ep. liberuro .. 

P r0P ° S1 ; ' , .dmtaWmttone voluntas sa~ 

^•1 : T ^o tS t.Cypoa„p.^. 



210 A3N ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

2nd. St. Cyprian's own expression, upon which this 
question more immediately depends, implies no manner 
of obligation in it; but on the contrary, denotes a free 
determination of his own will, * a primor dio Episcopates 
mei statuerim, says he, I have purposed or determined 
with myself, from the time I entered upon the Bisopric, 
that I wouid, act in common concert with you all. This 
was a rule, indeed, for the holy man to act by; but all 
the authority in it taken upon himself alone. So tli0 
learned Grotius expressly declared it to be, even when 
he was speaking in favor of the Presbyters and Presbyte- 
ry of the Church; for quoting this passage of St. Cyprian, 
•j* the word statuerim, says he, signifies a voluntary act of 
his own] and I presume the most partial reader finds no 
more of any legal obligation in it, than that discerning 
critic did. But, 

3dly, It is instead of many arguments t-r , 7 ^ no 

° nur nhle Bish 
law, Ecclesiastical or divine, oblige^ the case Ti 

op to his ordinary condescensiould not fi,^ 

4 r. • u- \r ■ ™ d so much 

our accurate Enquirer ni^y tor it: for had h f 

as a single one in all - P'ausible scheme *n ^ r° U 
i t a -jout it ev , ' P ef fect y 

te «o'e success of the si ^ SUCh P etitio »> and 

Pi** authority , n it , ^ / « £*% «d the peo . 
8Sthe BlSh °P h --,f Was no 1S a n bl he - too ; i ns o ffluch 

t A primoj-dio Ed-'scoimm.. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 211 

commission of his own, to ordain so much as a single 
clerk in his diocese, but as they should please to approve 
or disapprove of him. And all this, without one sacred 
text, one single canon, general or provincial, one clear 
precedent of matter of fact, so much as a positive affirm- 
ation of a single father of the Church, that it was Cath- 
olic custom and constitution to do so; but purely, because 
a wise and humble Bishop would have a chapter called, 
and take what counsel and information he possibly could 
from his Presbyters, and from his people too, before he 
would proceed to ordinations. For St. Cyprian's com- 
mune consilium, the consistorml Convention he was pleas- 
ed to call upon such occasions, is the very fundamental 
argument here for the whole scheme: Of which conven- 
tion, the holy Martyr himself tells us plainly enough 
what assistance he ever expected from it; when he acted 
most in common council with them all, for speaking in 
full and plain terms about it to his Presbyters, Deacons, 
and people together, he expresses the whole of his ex- 
pectations from them to be no more, than their evidence, 
information or testimony, about the qualifications or 
merits of the persons he purposed to ordain. * Humana 
testimorda are the very words he uses, to denote their part 
in all his clerical ordinations, as you will see in his 38th 
Epistle, where this custom of his is drawn up by his 
own pen. 

Now to draw such pregnant inferences as we have 
heard but now, and to raise such imaginary suppositions as 
are offered us here, from these consistory councils alona, 
is much the same thing, as if we should suppose, that 
some branch, at least, of royal authority must needs be- 

*Sed expectanda non sunt teslimonia humana. Cypt. Ep. 38. 
1. Edit. Oxon. 



212 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

long to the Privy Counsellors of a wise Prince, because 
he will seldom, or never, collate honors, er exert any 
important act of his sovereign power in the state, with- 
out entering first into council with them; and that a cau- 
tious and wise judge, who gets all the evidence and in- 
formation he possibly can, before he decides a cause, 
and probably forms his judgment in a great measure by 
the advantage of it, should therefore be said to allow a 
negative or casting voice to those witnesses, because 
they have some useful influence, in all appearance, upon 
his determination. St. Cyprian's case with his Presby- 
tery and people, both in his own account, and from the 
impartial judgment we have heard of others about it, has 
a plain and near resemblance to these; at least, I may 
say, the Enquiry before us offers nothing that can prove 
it to differ from them. For he proves no more, but that 
St. Cyprian had such a consistory council in his Church, 
-and made some use of it in his clerical ordinations, and I 
doubt not but other Churches did so too. But as to the 
candidate's petitionary application for craving orders 
from them, and his success depending upon their concilia- 
ry declaration in the case, and the people's authority to 
debar or exclude him, if they thought him unfit for them, 
^and the Bishops incapacity to ordain alone, he allows his 
fancy to infer and suppose all that, without one single 
proof or authority for either of them, unless his quota- 
tion, page 96. from Si. Cyprian's 68th Ep. § 4. must 
pass for a proof of the people's great interest and authori- 
ty in ordinations, which, I have shewn at large * before, 
he implies no such things at all. 

Y7e have seen then what St. Cyprian's commune con- 

* Chap. iii. p. 113, ?upra. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 213 

silium, or his ordinary consultations with his Presbytery 
and people, means. And in that, how much authority 
the learned Enquirer had to represent the primitive man- 
ner of ordaining Presbyters in such a singular and un- 
precedented form, ashe has done here. And if the read- 
er please to reflect upon what I have offered from holy 
scripture and primitive antiquity before, to prove that all 
ordaining power was originally a personal trust, fully and 
entirely invested in the single persons of the first Govern- 
ors of the Church, by divine and Apostolical Institution, 
and derived down so; I shall need to leave no other test 
with him to try this extraordinary scheme by. Yet, 
because the Enquirer himself has suggested one particu- 
lar more, immediately relating to this present case, I 
shall briefly mention it, forasmuch as it is his own. 

In the close of the former chapter he observes, * that 
all Churches were not furnished with Presiyters, and es- 
pecially new planted ones, where either the number or abil- 
ities of the believers ivere small and inconsiderable, which 
I make no doubt of; and therefore cannot but ask a few 
obvious questions about them. Can we think such new 
planted Churches were never so blessed with an increase 
of converts, as to stand in need of assisting Pastors to dis^ 
pense the word and sacraments to them? Do we believe 
there was no authority in the single pastors or Bishops, 
to whom those Churches were entirely committed, to 
supply that important want in them? Could the disci- 
pline of such Churches be executed by a joint council of 
Bishop and Presbytery, in the known Catholic sense of 
such an Ecclesiastical body, where no ordained Presbjr- 
lers were? Or have we any precedent or rule, for the 

* Enq. p. 77. 

19 



214 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

Bishops of such Sees to seek abroad in other Churched 
for necessary Ministers to assist them in case they stood 
in need? Unless all this can be supposed, besides what 
we have so liberally supposed before, we must allow that 
single Bishops of those primitive Churches had a power 
in their original commission to ordain assisting Elders for 
the necessities of their increasing flock or diocese, and, 
to be sure, to execute the discipline of the Church, with* 
out a regular Presbytery to give any kind of force or 
sanction to it. And the case of Titus's commission in 
Crete is evidence enough of all this, if we would impar- 
tially judge of it. For that there were no Church Minis- 
ters of any denomination at that time [settled there, is 
highly agreeable to the sacred account of it; and then it 
is clear, he must have ordained in that Island, without 
any such Presbytery to assist in it; for to that very pur- 
pose was he left there. Or if St. Paul had ordained any 
Elders there before, that would look very favorably on 
the Episcopal prerogative again, that such a single and 
peculiar Church Governor, as Titus was, should be nom- 
inated and sent thither with that special article at the 
head of his commission, if any Presbyters or Elders, al- 
ready resident amongst them, could have done it as well 
as he. 

Having seen then where the full power and right of or- 
dination always lay; if a candidate did petition for his or 
ders, one would think it should be directly there, even to the 
venerable Bishop alone. Or if, per adventure, for a tes- 
timonial of his qualifications and moral conversation, the 
Presbytery might not improperly be addressed to for it, 
or the more eminent of the people either; for recom- 
mendations from them had a considerable influence, to 
be sure, on every wise and careful Bishop in the Church; 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 215 

though should the candidate not proceed in s uch form, 
which we have little evidence to prove he did, yet the 
Bishop's voluntary consultations with them in the man- 
ner that the excellent St. Cyprian used it, did sufficient- 
ly supply that; and more than so, neither the Enquirer's 
own quotations, nor any other records of antiquity I meet 
with, do amount to. 

As to the particular qualifications, there mentioned to 
be usually enquired into, we need have little difference 
about them. Such as the ingenious author names, are 
primitive and genuine. And in the canons and ordina- 
tion offices of our own Church, such suitable provision 
is made for each of them, that if the spirit of peace and 
unity in the blessed primitive times were not more altered 
amongst us, than the constitution of the Church is, we 
should hear of few exceptions against it. For, 

1st. As to the age of a candidate, I find but little par- 
ticularly determined about it within the three first centu- 
ries; only, in general, that he should not be a novice; a 
word often used with little good intention in our times, 
and as little understood, for in the scripture sense of it, 
and as the word itself literally imports, <x novice can 
scarcely ever be ordained here now; because it signifies 
an adult person but very lately converted to the faith, and 
newly planted in the Church, as the bast * commentators 
agree in the exposition of it. But as to maturity of years 
in general, it has little or no reference to it, though St. 
Paul's use of the word to Timothy is by this learned au- 
thor here applied to that purpose. Whereas to be early 
baptized rather, and to have the advantages of a happy 

*See St, Jerome, Chrysosiome, O- Ecumenius, Theophylact; and, 
of later times Erasmus, Menochius, A Lapi !e, Dr. Hammond Gro- 
iius, in 1 Tim. iii. 6. 



216 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

education after it, for the improvement of knowledge in 
sacred and human learning together, are the proper 
considerations, in this respect, to form a reasonable 
judgment of maturity of age by; and in view of both 
these, in the age and nation wherein we live, our Holy 
Mother, the Church has * enjoined the age of candid- 
ates to be always enquired into, and allowed none to be 
ordained sooner, than in all probability, with these advan- 
tages, they may have attained to it; though she *(* com- 
mands a strict examination for farther assurance in it 
too, and $ suffers none to be advanced from the lowest to 
the highest order afterwards, without a gradual promo- 
tion to them, and a space of time given to try how they 
behave thsmselves in the first. And, 

2d. No less care does she take to confine all her min- 
isters to that holy employment alone, to which she has 
consecrated each of them || to lay out every hour they 
can get either in reading or hearing the Holy Scriptures; 
or some such laudable study or exercise as that, and to be 
ever doing what tends to piety and virtue, and to the ad- 
vancement of the Church of God; § interdicting all mean 
trade or employment in the world, and much more every 
loose and scandalous course of life, under penalty of all 
the censures she can inflict upon them. And, 

* Vide Can. 34. Edit. A. D . 1604, 

fCan. 35, 

\ lb. Can. 32, and Last Rub. in off. for Ord. Deacons 

11 Horis omnibus opponunis vel scripluris legendis aut audiendis 
incumbent, vel alii cuipiam studio aut exercitio laudabili vacabunt; 
ea semper facientes quai ad probitatem et virtutem spectent, seduloq; 
aperam dantes ut Ecclesiam Dei promoveant, &c. Can. 75. 

ft Nee vero sordidae alicui aut illiberali operae assuescent, nee pota- 
tionibus et crapulse se dedent, tempusv.e otiose transigent in alea r 
&c. lb., 



THE PRIMITIVE CKttttCT; £C, 317 

3dly, That she imitates the primitive Church in get- 
ting, what testimony and information she possibly caa 
even from the people themselves, before her Bishops or. 
dain any, I have * shewn already from the public man- 
ner of celebrating those sacred oflices, and the Holy 
Bishop's solemn appeal to the congregation to assign 
what crime or impediment they can, and even conjuring 
them in the name of God to do so; and whosoever will, 
has timely notice, and a free liberty for it; and the tes- 
timonials expected from the neighborhood where they 
lately lived, is another occasion for the same. And, 

Lastly, As to the trial of the candidate's understand- 
ing, and his advancement both in sacred and human 
learning, she is far from neglecting that, f She enjoins 
the venerable Bishop himself, if able to be present, to be 
strict and diligent in his examination; together with all 
the Presbyters who are to join in imposition of hands 
with^ him; requires it to be solemnized in the Cathedral 
itself, or the Bishop's parochial Church, and the rever- 
end Dean, Arch -Deacon, and two Prebendaries at least, 
to be present and assisting in it, or in case of legal ab- 
sence four of the gravest preaching Ministers who may 
be had: Besides testimonials required either from Colleg- 
es of Presbyters and graduates, where they have had 
their education, or some grave learned, and judicious per- 
sons, who have known their conversation for some years 
last past; which, should we calculate the numbers of the 
fullest Presbyteries in most of the primitive Churches, 
would perhaps amount to as considerable a multitude of 
proper counsellors in this case, as could ordinarily be 
Lad in those carefullest and purest ages of the Church,- 

* Ch, iii. p. 130. supra, 
t Vide Sal*, 31. 35. 
19* 



218 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

and consequently as much safety in it now, to use the * 
words and judgment of the wisest of men, as they could 
hope for then. 

What can any sons of peace then complain of here? 
Ordinations we have seen are an unquestionable part of 
the Bishop's commission alone; the manner of them is no 
otherwise set forth in Holy Scripture, than as prayer, and 
fasting and imposition of hands were the Apostolical way 
of conferring them. All other circumstanes in them 
were referred to the wisdom and judgment of the ordain- 
ers themselves; and in our own constitution, we find 
amen provision made for each of them, that had we but 
first learned the most essential rules of Church-member- 
ship, commanded in the Gospel, to love the brotherhood, 
obey them who are set over us in the Lord, and to keep 
the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, we should 
find little difficulty to own, that they were proper and 
sufficient means, if duly executed, to obtain the end for 
which they were designed. 

I should here close this subject and chapter together, 
but that our learned author has one insinuation, in the 
course of this argument against the modern custom of 
receiving tythes, which he may think, perhaps, deserves 
to be considered. 

In quoting a passage from St. Cyprian's 66th Epistle, 
he met with these words, relating to the maintenance of 
the Ministry f In honor e sportu "antium fratrum, tanquam 
decimas, ex fruclibus accipicntes, which he translates 
thus; Tythes receiving subscription from the brethren. 
And with nearer analogy to the words, and quite as 

* Pro v. xi. 14. 

t Enq, p. 86, 87. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 219 

much kindnessto the Church, he might as well have ren- 
dered them, the Clergy's living on the basket. For some 
allusion there is indeed to that, but to subscriptions of 
the brethren, not the least, that I can see. The true ac- 
count of this phrase will occasion some digression; but it 
shall be as short as I can make it. 

That the primitive Christians paid their first-fruits to 
God, Origen assures us, when he says, * To whom we pay 
first-fruits, to him we also offer up our prayers. Irenseus 
farther, when speaking of f the oblations of the Christian 
Church, we ought, says he, to offer to God the first-fruits 
of his creature-, even as Moses says, Thoushalt not appear 
empty before the Lord thy God; and that these first-fruits, 
in the language of the fathers, included even tythes in 
them, I might offer Clemens Alexandrinus' authority for 
it, who in one short sentence makes them both to be terms 
equivalent; ^ the tythes of fruits and cattle, says he, taught 
piety towards God; for out of these first-fruits, (which 
he called fy^es, you see just before) I conceive the Priests 
also were maintained. But Irenasus needs no illustration 
of his sense in this case, who expressly says, that j| ills 

• 0,8s rag a~apx a S cnzoSiSiop&if, tstu nai Tag evxag avairifiirofitv . Ojig, 
c. Cels. Edit. Hoeschel. August. Vinrl. 1605. 

fEcclesise oblatio,quam Dominus docuit offerri. &c. — Offerre igitui 
oportet Deo primitias ejus creatnrse, sicut el Moyses ait, Non appar^ 
bis vacuus ante ccnspectum Domini Dei tui. Iren. 1.4. c. 34* 

^ JLl 6iKa]ai to)v Kap-uv koli Qps'ijialuiv svasSuv'Je eig Qnov — tSiSaffKov. tm 
tvtuv yap ol/xai rwv anapxuv Kai ol tepeis Stelpetpovjo* Strom. 1. 2, p. 397, 
Edit. Lutet. 1629. 

[] Iren. 1. 4, c . 27. Et quia Dominus naluralia Jegis, per qus homo 

justificatur non dissolvit, sed extendi t, sed et implevit, ex sermon- 

ibus ejus ostenditur pro eo quod est, non moschaberis, nee concu- 

piscere praecepit; et pro eo quod est, non occides, neq ; irasciquidem; 
et pro eo quod est, decimare omnia, quae sunt pauperibua dividere;: 



220 AN ORIGINAL DIt AUGHT OP 

law of paying tythes was no more abrogated by our Saviours 
doctrine, than those two precepts in the Decalogue, against 
adultery and murder, were; but, like them, more enlarged 
and completed by it; insomuch that, as the Jews consecra* 
ted the tythes of their possessions to God, so Christians, 
says he, gave all they had to such uses as the Lord had for 
it; and what uses the Lord had for it, St. Paul tells us, 
where he calls it * an ordinance of the Lord, that such as 
preach the gospel should live of the gospel, even so, as 
such as ministered in holy things [before] lived of the 
things of the temple, and such as waited at the altar were 
partakers with the altar. [1 Cor. ix. 13, 14.] 

To apply this therefore to the case before us: Out of 
these first-fruits, these holy oblations, these tythes, and 
overplus of tythes thus deposited by the primitive Chris- 
tians in the holy Apostles' hands at first, and in the hands 
of the venerable Bishops of the Church for some consid- 
erable time after; those faithful stewards of this conse- 
crated treasure allotted a suitable proportion to each 
Presbyter, Deacon, and other inferior officers in the 
Church; and withal, to such poor brethren as stood in 
need of maintenance; in which distribution, every cleri- 
cal officer's part was called his f sportula, or basket of 
the consecrated offerings, in allusion to that custom pre- 
scribed by the Jewish law, that every Israelite who dwelt 
remote from the temple at Jerusalem, should bring his 

hec omnia non dissolventis erant legem, seel adimplentis, et extenden- 
tis, ct dilatantis in nobis, 

• Et propter hoc illi (sc. Judeei) decimas suorutn habebant consecra- 
tas, qui autem perceperunt libertatem ; omnia quse sunt ipsorum ad Do- 
minicosdecernuntusus, Idem, ib, c. 34. 

t Csterura presbyterii honorem designasse nos illls jam sciatis, ut et 
sportulis iisdem cum presbyteris honorentur, et divisiones mensurna^ 
sequatis quantitatibus partiantur. Cypr. Ep, 39, ad finem. Edit. Ox<# 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 221" 

first-fruits in a basket thither; [Deut. xxvL 2.] and ac- 
cordingly, the several ministers who received such por- 
tion of those hallowed oblations, were called the sportu- 
lantes fr aires, by St. Cyprian here and elsewhere, that 
is, brethren who had their maintenance from those dedica- 
ted things. 

How fairly, then, this manner of maintaining the 
priesthood in the primitive Church is, without any farther 
note upon it, but as in an ordinary notion of the word, 
represented to be by the mere subscription of the brethren, 
I leave with the unprejudiced reader to judge. 

The holy fathers, themselves, we see, own a * natural 
obligation to pay such tythes and offerings to the great 
Author of all we possess, as the heathens did indeed, 
which we may see clearly set forth, in a short comment 
of the late venerable Bishop Fell, upon the closa of St. 
Cyprian's Treatise of the unity of the Church. They 
argued the obligation of it also, from the morality of tha 
Mosaic law in that particular. They profecs that our 
Lord's doctrine did not dissolve, but complete that obli- 
gation, by enlarging the former bounds and measures of 
it. 

What is wanting here then, to make the sense and 
practice of the primitive and modern Christiana pgrae in 
this matter, unless we amuse ourselves about forms r::d 
circumstances of a duty, and overlook the thing? Little 
difference, as I can see, between us; but that there was 
no secular law then to enforce the duty upon primitive 
Christians, as indeed it was scarcely possible there should 
be, all power of that kind being lodged then in persecu- 
ting heathen hands, from whence it were absurd to look 

*Dominus naturalia legis per quae homo justincatur, non dksolviu 
Iren. upon this subject, ut supra. 



222 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

for it. Nor probably did any Canon of the Church so 
explicitly enjoin, or require it then, as they have done 
since; for which Mr. Selden himself has given a sufficient 
reason. For * it had been little to the purpose indeed, 
says he, to have had tythes of annualincr ease paid, (and 
I may say required or demanded by the Church too) 
while that most bountiful devotion of good Christians con- 
tinned in frequent offerings, both of lands and goods, to 
suth large value: and this, as he observes, continued to 
the end of the fourth century, [Hist, of Tythes, Cap. 4. 
n. 2. p. 40.] In the mean time, those primitive Chris- 
tians, we have seen, performed the thing itself, in as 
direct, and more eminent manner, as they themselves 
relate it, than the true Church of (Sod ever did, either 
before or since; and that by virtue of a natural, consci- 
entious, and Evangelical obligation lying upon them to 
do so, wherein the very essence and reason of the duty, 
in the sense of modern Christians also, wholly does con- 
Gist. But I have stayed longer than was intended in this 
digr3Ssion. If St. Cyprian's expression be something 
chared by it, it is all I designed. I shall therefore leave 
ihis subject, andclo£8 this chapter together, and proceed 
to what follows in the learned Enquiry before me. 






CHAP. VI. 

Hitherto we have heard the proper acts of the Clergy 
only; those peculiar to the Laity are considered next. 
Ke briefly mentions, 1st, the means of becoming mem- 
bers of the Church, and thea tells uz what powers and 
actions the Laity exerted distinctly by themselves. No 

*See Seidell's Review, annexed tahis Hist, of Tythes, c. 4. p. 462. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 223 

controversy need be raised about the former: That 
Baptism makes members of the Church, I think is agreed 
by all, who own any, and that it gives a right to all the 
peculiar privileges of the Church, that is, to all the spirit- 
ual means of grace and salvation; in such order as by 
divine and Apostolical institution they are administered 
in it, till such time as they forfeit that right by just cen- 
sures for their faults, I take to be equally true. But 
our learned author in his late clause upon this head, en- 
titles his Lay-members to powers and privileges of anoth- 
er nature. They had power, he says, to elect their Bish- 
ops; and in case they proved scandalous, heretical, or 
apostates from the faith, to depose them too. And these 
powers he makes so iull and proper to them, that he 
reckons them among * the discretive and particular acts 
of the laity, insomuch that if they called in any particu- 
lar Bishops, or a synod of Bishops, to assist or concur 
with them in it, he f represents that as an act of modesty 
or discretion only in them, and the power entirely their 
own. 

Now the Laity's electing power I have at large consid- 
ered before, and refer the reader to what I have offered 
there. Their deposing power, so far as it is maintained 
here, is wholly grounded upon a single passage in the 
answer of St. Cyprian and his African Synod to the Cler- 
gy and people of Legio, Asturica, and -Emerita in Spain, 
The case of which Churches, at that time, was this; their 
late Bishops, Basilides and Martialis, being notoriously 
convicted of idolatry, blasphemy, and other crimes of the 
highest nature, Felix and Sabinus were by a Synod 
of the province constituted Bishops in their stead. — 
The ejected Bishops secretly applied themselves to Ste- 

• Enq. p. 103. t Enq. p, 105. 



224 



AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 



phen, Bishop of Rome; who, knowing little of the merits 
of the cause, or over-forward, as it is most likely, to 
shew some prerogative of his See, admits them into his 
communion, and restores them to their Bishoprics, as far 
as his power would go. Upon this, they return to their 
respective Churches, and claim a right to their Sees 
again. The people meet with two great difficulties in 
this case; 

1st, Whether their old Bishops, being received now 
into communion with an orthodox Bishop of the Catholic 
Church, had not recovered, by that means, a title to their 
own Churches; according to the Catholic rule, that com- 
munion with one Church, gave a right of communion 
with all. And, 

2d, Whether it were warrantable for them, be their 
claim never so good, to communicate in all holy offices 
with such idolatrous and apostate Bishops, as Basilides 
and Martialis were certainly known to be. 

For satisfaction in these points, as appears by the * 
Epistle, wherein the present quotation lies, they write 
to a provincial Synod in Africa, wherein St. Cyprian 
himself presided at that time; the Synod, in answer to 
the first of their scruples, flatly tells them, f that all 
which Pope Stephen had done through the deceitful insin- 
uations of their deprived Bishops, could not disannul the 
regular and just ordination of their new ones, but that 
Basilides and Martialis were justly deposed, and the oth- 
ers duty ordained in their room. And if we would know 

*Cyp. Ep. G7. Edit. Oxon. 

f Nee rescindere ordinationem jure peifectam potest, quod Basilides ; 
Sxephanum collegam nostium longe positum, et gestae rei ac tacitse ver- 
ftatis ignarum fefellit, ut exambiret reponi se injusie in episcopatum, de 
quo fueiit juste depositus; sed nee Martiali potest profuisse fallacia* 
<Cypr. F t p. 67. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 225 

by what power this change was made, St. Cyprian will 
satisfy us; who in express terms * tells us, that Sabinus* 
ordination into Basilides' See ivas by the regular authority 
of a Synod of Bishops, who met upon the place for it; and 
surely Felix's case must have been the same, since that 
was the known Catholic practice in those times and 
places, and both those new Bishops were f sent by their 
respective Churches, to represent their common case to 
the African Synod, and both recognized alike as fellow- 
Bishops by them all. The deposition therefore was over, 
and new ordinations synodically passed, before the peo- 
ple wrote to the African council for any advice in their 
case, and all declared by the council to be just and valid, 
and such as the Bishop of Rome could not disannul. — 
What a groundless imagination must it then be, to think 
that the Laity of those Churches should enquire any thing 
of that Synod about their own deposing or electing pow- 
er, when all of that, kind was over in a synodical way be- 
fore, and that they themselves had approved of what was 
done? No! it is plain enough, by the whole tenor of the 
council's answer to them, that the two queries above men- 
tioned were the difficulties they wanted to be resolved in; 
and that the latter of them, relating to their joining in 
religious offices with those idolatrous Bishops, supposing 
their claim to be good, was directly referred to, and 
clearly answered by that very quotation, which is here 
so unduly applied to a deposing power. The circum- 

* Quod et apud vos factum videmus in Sabini College nostri or&na- 
tione, ut de universal fraternitai.is suffragio, [and what that suffragiimi 
means I. have shewn before] et de Episcoporum, qui in prseser.ua con- 

renerant judicio, episcopatus ei deferretur, et manus ei in locum 

Basilidis impaneretur. Cyp. lb. $ 3. 

tLegimus literas vestras, quas ad nos per Felicem et Sabinum Co* 
«pi«copos nostros pro fidei vestrse integrhate fecistis. lb. § 1. 
2Q 



226 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

stances they were in, explain the thing; they had two 
sorts of competitors, claiming a right of ministry amongst 
them, the deposed idolators, Basilides and Martialis, on 
the one hand, and the Orthodox synodically ordained 
Felix and Sabinus on the other; neither of them of their 
own setting up, or putting down, but both by the synodical 
authority of the province. Now, which of these compet- 
itors they thought themselves obliged to communicate 
with, the African council told them, they had a liberty in 
that to choose and refuse; which is just such a power of 
making arid deposing Bishops, as the Israelites had in 
that solemn competition for the priesthood in the wilder- 
ness, when they separated themselves from Corah and his 
usurping Levites, and kept close to Aaron their lawful 
high-priest; and the African Synod, it is plain, thought 
no otherwise of it; * for they make that very comparison, 
in this place, and apply the quotation here insisted upon 
immediately to it. 

And however our learned author came to strain this 
clear passage to so very different a sense, he himself was 
•j- conscious, we find, that at the deposing of any Bishop, 
a convention of Bishops was always present wherever 
it could be had; nay he confesses, the deposing power 
is directly % ascribed to Synods by the fathers of the 
Church, and gives us remarkable instances of it in the 
cases of Paulus Samosatenus, and Privatus Bishop of 
Lambese, and might have added several more, even [] 

* Separamini, inquit, a tabernaculis hominum istorum, &c . propter 
qnod plebs — a peccatore prseposito separare se debet, uec se ad sacri- 
legii sacerdotissacrificia rniscere, quando ipsa maxime habeat potesta- 
tern vel eligendi dignos sacerdotes, vel indignos recusandi. Cypr. lb. 

1 SeeEnq. p. 105. jEnq. lb, 

J Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 1 . 7. c. 30. and Cypi . Ep. 55. * 11. Ediu 
Oxon. 




THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 227 

where he had these. But all this synodical solemnity, 
in our Enquirer's account of it, was only through the 
gracious condescension of the humble people, who would 
not, though they might and could, do all, * by virtue of 
their own power. This is a glorious account of the hon- 
orable use and great power of the sacred Synods of the 
primitive Church; they were to be ready at the summons 
of any people, who thought it needful to change their 
Bishop; and why? That the people's actions in it, says 
he, might be more authentic and unquestionable. More aw- 
thentic, it seems, though they themselves, he says, had 
full authority to do it; and less questionable, though the 
African council had just before asserted, and that flatly 
too, (as his words are, that is, beyond all question, I think) 
the people's power to depose. But farther, they allowed 
the Synod to examine, says he, their complaints and accu- 
sations too; and so they were commissioners, besides, to 
examine witnesses for them, and when that was done, 
they might concur, says he, in the deposition with them; 
and if they only might do so, then they might not too; 
as this whole hypothesis of his popular power implies it 
to be needless indeed. Thus the sacred Synods were to 
be ornaments and under officers in this great solemnity, 
whilst the venerable Court of Laity proceeded to depose 
their Bishop by their own inherent right and power, and 
chose another in his room : And which is stranger still, 
the holy fathers and historians of these times took a lib- 
erty to tell the world, that Bishops in their times were 
deposed by Synods of Bishops in the Church, for so the 
learned Enquirer himself immediately shews us that they 
did, and in the very next breath, unwarily owns also* 
that such a provincial Synod was f necessary in the elec 
* See En(|. p .105. f-^nq. p, 106, 



£28 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

tion or deposition of a Bishop, against the plain sense of 
all that he had said before. Such pregnant instances of 
the discreiive and 'particular acts of the Laity, as our 
learned author undertook to prove them, were these two 
important privileges of deposing, and electing Bishops for 
themselves. 

The rest of this chapter sets forth the admirable dis- 
cipline of the primitive Church, in leading her adult con- 
verts through all the stages of catechetical instruction, till 
she fitted them for the heavenly blessing of her holy bap- 
tism. A precedent! of piety and wisdom, fit for all ages 
to set before their eyes, in training up the younger 
and unexperienced members of the Church, though not 
directly applicable, or very rarely at least in the primi- 
tive and original use of it, to our own times; since most 
Christians are baptized in their infancy now. 

And yet, if we will distinguish justly here, and I am 
sorry there should be need of that, between constitution 
itself, and personal neglects of it; between the pious laws y 
orders and canons, of our most holy mother the Church 
of England, and the too imperfect executing of them in- 
deed, by her sons at this day; we must own that that faith- 
ful parent of ours has not been wanting in making suita- 
ble provision for a due instruction of all the tenderest, 
and more undisciplined members of her communion. 

Her care for her very infant members, commences 
with the first hour of their entering into covenant with 
God. She requires duly qualified sureties, as so many 
spiritual guardians for them, besides what God and na- 
ture gives them in their Christian parents, to look to their 
religious education, as soon as the first seeds of reason 
spring up in them. She conjures these, as a charge then 
taken upon them, in the presence of God and his Church, 



TttM PUflfaHftfk ciiuKcn, &c. 229 

to see that they be forthwith taught, as soon as they be 
able to learn, the nature and importance of their baptis- 
mal vow, and all other things which a Christian ought to 
know and believe to the saving of his soul; dismissing 
them with her own fervent addresses first to the throne of 
grace, that that infant Christian might lead the rest of its 
life according to that beginning. And not content with 
this, she * enjoins every minister of hers in their respec- 
tive Parishes, to attend continually on this very work; 
commanding them under penalty of the highest censures 
she can inflict, to catechise children, youth, and every ig- 
norant person within their Cure, upon every Lord's da.j t 
and other holy festivals throughout the year, till they 
become thoroughly instructed in all the articles of the 
Christian faith, in the duty of prayer, and all practical 
rules of a holy life; and that none may want it, she lays 
as strict an obligation upon all those, to whom God, na- 
ture, and civil laws, have given authority over the youth 
and servants of their families, and even upon the young 
and ignorant ones themselves too, as the power of the 
keys allows her, to use their respective authority, and do 
their several parts in carrying on this blessed work, for 
the good of them all; that, if possible, no soul might mis- 
carry, or the Church be reproached, through the igno- 
rance or immorality of any of her members. 

Thus far she goes in the first stage of the excellent 
primitive discipline; and before she allows them to be per- 
fect communicants with her, she commands examination 
t€> be made of the progress of these younger members of 
hers in this catechetical discipline, and requires all who 
can give a good account of it, to come and receive great- 
er helps of the holy Spirit, for their establishment and 

* Vide Can. 59. Edit. A. B- 1604 
20* 



230 AN ORIGINAL DRAXJGHT OF 

perseverance in faith and a good life, by the sacred rite 
of her solemn confirmation; and so gradually admits them 
into the highest class of her blessed children, by the holy 
eucharist at last. 

Here is some visible resemblance, an impartial eye 
must see, of the incomparable discipline of the purest 
ages of the Church. Copies of this nature, we must ex- 
pect, will fall short of their originals; and more and more 
so, by distance of time. But whatever our uncharitable 
adversaries may say, it is a comfort to see so fair a 
draught of it preserved within our own national constitu- 
tion, to these very last and worst of times. And if we 
looked calmly into things, instead of aggravating our 
resentments against personal abuses of them, we should 
find our holy mother the Church has suffered more re- 
proaches from her enemies, and from too many of her 
unnatural children too, both in this, and many other parts 
of her wise and pious constitution, than she has ever 
deserved of them. 

But to return to the Enquiry again, which after the ex- 
traordinary account it has given us of the the peculiar 
acts and special powers of the Laity of the primitive 
Church, proceeds to treat next of the conjunct acts of the 
Clergy and Laity together; wherein the general propo- 
sition is this, || That all things belonging to the Government 
and policy of the Church, were performed by their joint 
consent and administrations. The people, on one hand, 
could do nothing, says he, without their Bishop, as St. 
Ignatius, he owns, affirms in general terms; and seems 
satisfied, that in every Church it was so. But that the 
Bishops, on the other hand, could do nothing without 
their people's consent, he offers nothing more to prove it 
* SeeEnq. p. 106. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C# 231 

here, than what I have shewn already is no proof of 
Catholic practice at all, and much less of Ecclesiastical 
law for it; and that is, St. Cyprian's private purpose 
again, to act in concert with his Clergy and people in 
the chief affairs of the Government of his Church; which, 
as himself explained it, and other cotemporary witnesses, 
I have shewn, confirmed it to us, was a voluntary con- 
descension of his own; and that he used their advice and 
information only in the causes which came before him, 
and owned no other power or authority in them, or was 
any ways obliged or bound to do so much as he did in it; 
and more than this need not be said here, till we meet 
with new arguments upon this head, which we must look 
for in the next chapter. 



CHAP. VII. 

The constitution of the primitive Church has been lha 
general subject of all that is gone before. The discipline 
of it is to be considered now. It is introduced with prop- 
er observations of the necessity, nature and admirable 
advantages of it; about which there need be no dispute* 
For that the first Christian Church is a true Society, and 
has a government annexed to it as such; that it is a spir- 
itual one, and therefore her own proper laws, orders and 
penalties, purely Spiritual too; that admonitions, ex- 
communications, suspensions, and the like, as our learn- 
ed author here observes, are peculiar acts of this Spiritual 
Power, is readily agreed; and all the brightest charac- 
ters and glorious encomiums, which from the elegafit 
pen of St. Cyprian are here transcribed, concerning tho 
usefulness excellency, and necessity of this holy disoi- 



232 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

pline, are no more than what are due to it;for, to use the? 
Apostle's words, whatsoever things are true, honest, just, 
pure, lovely, or of good report, if any virtue or any praise; 
they all fade or flourish in proportion to the remissness 
of it; and may the respective trustees or stewards in the 
house of God, to whom any part of this important charge 
is committed, be ever mindful of it! Who they specially 
are, and in the primitive Church were ever owned to be, 
is the question now before us. 

Our learned Enquirer, you see, has just now told us, 
that the Clergy and Laity together have a right to [this 
Ecclesiastical power, as in joint commission with one 
another; they were all judges, as he * here farther affirms,, 
in the Ecclesiastical Court; , insomuch that they perform 
all things belonging to the Government and policy of the 
Church, by their pint consent and administrations 

His fundamental proof of this, is taken from such in- 
terpretations, as he tells us some of the primitive Fa- 
thers made of those two eminent texts, where the power 
of the keys is expressly promised; namely, Mat. xvi. 18, 
19. where they are promised to St. Peter only, by name; 
and Mat. xviii. 15, 16, 17, 18, where in general terms 
they seem to be given to the Church; and it is somewhat 
strange, that betakes no notice of a third text, where this 
power was more solemnly promised, and by a sacred 
symbol from the mouth of the blessed Jesus, assured to 
those persons, for whom it will appear, I think, it was 
peculiarly designed. I mean, that text in St. John xx. 
21, 22, 23. where our Lord breathed on those disciples, 
whom he then sent, as the Father had sent him, and that 
is surely the Apostles alone, that very mission confirm- 
ing the name and title to them, saying, receive the Holy 

* See Enq, p. 112. $ 3. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 233 

Ghost, ivhosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them, 
&c. But I shall not interrupt our learned Enquirer's 
method, on account of this omission here, but fairly state 
his arguments in the way lie offers them to us. 

Th ; s power of the keys ,as promised to St. Peter, in 
St. Matt. xvi. 18. 19 he confesses, upon * Origen's 
authority, truly quoted for it, the Bishops of the primi- 
tive Church applied to themselves; and owns also, that very 
ancient Father allowed it to be orthodox in those Bishops 
to do so, so long as they held Petals confession, and were 
such as the Church of Christ might be built upon-, and that 
is, surely, so long as they were true and Orthodox Bish- 
ops of the Catholic Church. But what is more surpris- 
ing to me, f he tells us that St. Cyprian himself was of 
the same opinion also; and quotes that veiy passage for 
the proof of it, which I have elsewhere cited from that 
holy martyr upon much the same occasion; the Church, 
says St. Cyprian, % is founded upon the Bishops, by whom, 
every Ecclesiastical action is governed. St. Cyprian then 
thought just the same, it seems, as Origen did in this mat- 
ter; that the Orthodox Bishops might justly claim the 
power of the keys to themselves alone. Though others 
of the ancients, as the Enquiry adds here, mention this 
power as given to the whole Church, according to that in 
St. Mat. xviii. 15, &c. And how clearly that appears, 
we shall quickly see. 

But, in the mean time, here is a truth acknowledged 
now; which, if earlier ov/ned, might have prevented a 

* See Enq.- p. 113. and Grig. Comment, in Matth. Tom . 12. >. 
279. Vol. Edit. Huetii,Rothomagi, 1669- 

f Enq. p. 114. 

JEcelcsia super episcopcs constilnatur, et omnis actus Ecclesiie 
per cosdem precnositos gubernetur, Cypr, Ep. 27. Edit. Pamel, or 
Ep. 33, Edit. Oion. $ 1, 



234 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

considerable part of this elaborate Enquiry; for what nu- 
merous quotations have we met with? and still shall mee* 
with more, from the venerable St. Cyprian's works, to 
prove, that not only Presbyters had a ruling power inhe- 
rent in their orders, in respect of excommunications, ab- 
solutions, and such like manifest acts of the sacred power 
of the keys; but that the Laity also, as well as they, had 
a share oi legislative, decretive, and judicatorial power in 
the consistory of the Church. And yet this very St. Cy- 
prian himself is now declared to have been wholly of 
that opinion, that the Bishops alone, by virtue of the or- 
iginal grant of the keys to St. Peter, did in the primitive 
Church justly appropriate all that power to themselves. 
What can more directly confirm all that I have proved 
at large before in these several particulars? namely, that 
whatever part either Presbyters, Deacons, or people had 
in any such authoritative acts of discipline or govern- 
ment in his Church; it was upon one or other of these two 
accounts, either that St. Cyprian commissioned some 
amongst them, whose character and station made them 
the proper officers, in many cases, to execute some parts 
of discipline, which he authentically agreed to be done 
by virtue of the power of the keys invested in himself; 
or else, that he purely condescended, according to his 
humble purpose at the first, to take counsel, information, 
and advice only, from his Clergy and people, in all im- 
portant acts of his administration. And if there had been 
more in it, he must have practised otherwise than his 
own opinion of these matters is here truly owned to have 
been. 

Thus far, then, the joint administration of Clergy and 
people, together with their Bishop, in the government of 
the Church, is set aside by Origen and St. Cyprian's 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 235 

interpretations of the original promise to St. Peter; as to 
any power the two former were entitled to by it, from 
which promise and commission, as our learned Enquirer 
* owns, all power thai any Church Court exerted, was 
derived. 

What is offered then to balance such evidence and 
authority as this? Whv! others of the ancients, says 
our learned author, mention this power as given to the 
whole Church, according to that in St. Mat. xviii. 17, 
18. Tell it unto the Church, but if he neglect to hear the 
Church, let him be unto thee as a heathen and publican. 
Verily I say unto you, whatsoever you shall bind on earth, 
sliall be boundin Heaven, &c. By the Church here, says 
he, is to be understood the whole body of a particular 
Church, or Parish, unto which some of the Fathers attri- 
bute the power of the kets. And yet it is remarkable, 
that neither of the two fathers he produces to prove it, 
argue upon this text at all, but from the two others I have 
mentioned before; the one from the grant to St. Peter, in 
SU Mat. xvi. 19. the other from St' John, xx. 21, &c. 
But let us hear their evidence. Tertullian's, so far as 
the Enquirer is pleased to give it us, is this: f If thou 
jearest Heaven to be shut, remember the Lord gave its keys 
to Peter, and by him to the Church. The rest of the sen- 
tence is; which keys, every one who is brought to the ques. 
tion lucre, and confesses [Christ,] will carry along u ith him* 
If our author had thought fit to give us "this period entire, 
and of the occasion of it too, we should have needed little 

•SeeEnq. p. 113. 

i Si adhuc clausum putas cesium, memento claves ejus hie Domi»- 
*sa Pelro, ei per eum Ecclesics reliquisse, quas hie unusquigq ; interro 
gaius atq; confessus feret secum. Term], Scorpiac. p. 028. Kigali 
EdiU lecuada., Lutet. 1641. 



236 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

more to understand what Tertullian meant. For in what 
sense do we imagine this penetrating father should say, 
that the keys given to Peter were thereby given to the 
Church, so that every martyr or counsellor in it, should 
carry them to Heaven with them? Was it in such a 
sense, do we think, as it is here required to be taken in? 
namely, that they should exercise an Ecclesiastical dis- 
cipline with them? By that construction we might as 
well conclude, that they were to continue such a disci- 
pline in the other world still. No! the plain occasion of 
the words will expound them clearly for us; he was argu- 
ing against heretics, * who held it needless for persecu- 
ted Christians to confess Christ on earth; it was enough, 
they said, to confess him hereafter in Heaven, Tertull- 
ian f replies, there is no coming thither, unless first ap- 
proved here; no occasion for such trial there, where no 
persecution can be; no fanciful porters, as the chimerical 
pagans dream, to stop a Christian's coming in. Christ 
had opened Heaven for every true Christian by his own 
entrance thither. Or if you think that Heaven is shvi 
still, says he, reniemher the Lord, lift the keys to Peter, 
and by him to the Church, which every one who is brought 
to the trial here, am! confesses Chris*, will carry along 
with Mm. Here is a manifest advantage declared indeed 
to every member of the Church by the grant of the keys 
to St. Peter, and of such a nature, that, if they made a 
right use of it, would help them all to Heaven, in refer- 
ence no doubt, to our Saviour's words at the first delive- 
ry of them, that whatsoever should be bound or loosed 
on earth by these keys, should be bound or loosed in 

# Adseverat diatnlus iTl'ic confUenduin, ut suadeat hie negandu»» 
Tert. lb. 
t lb. p. 627. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 237 

Heaven; which is a clear comment on Tertullian's words 
here, and implies, that the keys were so given to all the 
Church in general, that if they made that advantage of 
them which was intended for them, by duly fitting them- 
selves for the holy absolution appointed to be administer, 
ed by them, they would find that comfortable sentence 
ratified above; and, peradventure, the virtue of that grant 
should extend farther to Martyrs and Confessors, through 
their very confession alone, where no more was to be 
had, as the common opinion of the ancients was. This 
comes up, I think, to the sense of Tertullian's whole peri- 
od, but marks out no particular persons; and much less 
th ) whole Church, as entitled to the present power of 
those keys, but only that such an universal blessing ac- 
crued to the church by them, and to every member of 
it, who would lit themselves for that benefit of them. 

Firmilian, Bishop of Csesarea in Cappadocia, is joined 
with Turtullian, as another of the ancients, who under- 
stood this 'promise, of the keys to be made to the whole 
Church. This venerable fathei was arguing, pretty 
warmly indeed, against Stephen, Bishop of Rome, for 
allowing, that remission of sins could be given within 
the synagogues of heretics, as his own words are, that is 
amongst such as were out of the Catholic Church, urging 
those two eminent texts to prove the contrary: First, * 
that it was Peter alone, to whom Christ said, whatsoever 
thou shaltbind in earth, shall be bound in Heaven; Matt. 
xvi. 1$. and afterwards, it was the Apostles alone, upon 
whom he breathed and gave the same power; John. xx. 
22, 23. and therefore c ncludes, in the quotation herein- 

*Qaalis error sit, et q-juntasit coeciias eju?, qui remissionem pecca- 
ttmim elicit ajmd synagogas haereticonim dari posse ApucI Cypr- 
Eo. 75. E.iit. Oxon. $ 9. 
21 



238 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

sisted upon, * That the poicer of forgiving sins was given 
to the Apostles , and to the Churches which they planted, 
and to the Bishops who succeeded them, by being ordained 
into their places. Now one would be apt to ask this 
plain question here; why did Firmilian so distinctly say 
this power of the keys was given to the Bishops, when 
he had said, but just before, it was given to the Churchesl 
Were these Bishops r.o part of the Churches? Were they 
not included in them? or had his argument been any 
ways more imperfect without that special addition, who 
was only proving that remisson of sins was peculiarly 
and solely within the Churches, and had no need to 
prove more? The least I can conceive of it is this, that 
the keys, in his opinion, were given to the Churches in 
one sense, and to the Bishops in another; else it was rath- 
er tautology, than propriety of speaking, to have distin- 
guished the grant so. And if we mearly consider the 
Holy Father's period entire as it is, and observe the ap- 
plication he was to make of it there, we shall see a very 
different nature of grant affirmed by him; and discover 
plainly too, where that difference lies. 7 he power of re- 
miiting sins, says he, was given to the Apostles, and, as the 
sacred text speaks, from whence he just then proved it 
to be so, f it was' the Apostles alone, and that was, doubt- 
less, without any joint commission to Apostles and breth- 
ren together; and then in the same breath, he tells us, 
that it was given to the Bishops as their successors, ly a 
vicarious ordination. What was this less, than in plain 
terms to say, that the Bishops were ordained to enter 

*Potestas ergo peccatorum remittendoium Apostolis data est, et 
"Ecclessis, quas ill i a Chiisto missi constltuRiunt, et Episcopis qui eis 
ordinatinne vicaria successerunt. Apud Cypr. Ep. 75. Edit. Ox- 

on. t 9. 

\ In solos Apostplo? insufflavh Christus, dicens. lb. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 239 

upon the Apostle's title and possession of that power he 
was then speaking of, and to hold it in such a manner as 
they themselves had held it? So far, I think, Firmilian'a 
own periodexplains itself. But what did the Holy Bish- 
op mean, you will say, when in the intermediate comma 
he tells us, that the powzr was given to the Churches which 
the Apostles constituted! The subject he was upon as 
clearly explains this clause, as his own words did the 
other. He was to prove against Tope Stephen, that 
Baptism without the pale of the Church was of no force, 
because remission of sins was only to be had within it. 
Now, having only proved, by the other two clauses of 
this period, that the Apostles first, and Bishops after 
them, were in sole and full possession of that power 
within the Churches. This did not undeniably prove 
yet, but that some one or more of those Bishops, being 
either by just ccnouro or voluntary separation, removed 
out of their Churches, might exercise all their Ministry 
still, with as good effect as before; and the remission of 
sins might by their means be had as well without as with, 
in. Now, to obviate such exceptions as these, and to 
make his argument every way perfect, he adds this 
clause, That tlie power was given to the Churches, that 
is, so peculiarly to them, and them only, that none could 
either validly use or exercise that power, if once they 
were gone out of them, or receive any fruit or ben- 
efit of it, but from the hands of such as were in them; and 
this comes up in every point to the argument he was up- 
on, against the validity of heretical baptism. And that 
this construction of the whole period agrees with the 
sense, and language too, of this very Firmilian himself, 
upon a like occasion, will evidently appear; by repeat- 
ing only a quotation from him out of this very Epistle, 



240 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

which we met with some time since in * the Enquiry now 
before us. *|* All power and grace says Firmilian, is con- 
stituted in the Church, where Elders preside, who possess 
the power of baptizing and laying on of hands, and ordain- 
ing. Here all power is at large said • to> be in the Church, 
an expression every way equivalent to what we dispute 
of now in this very quotation, and then immediately it is 
added, that Elders preside there, who possess the power 
of baptizing, laying on of hands, and ordaining; and 
doubtless had FirmUian's argument required it there, 
he had gone on and proved that possession of power to 
have been in the same Elders in respect of any other act 
of Government or discipline besides; for the reason had 
been the same, and the limitation of all power in that 
manner imports no less. Now, that those presiding El- 
ders were true and proper Bishops, I have proved at 
large before, though so much is not required here since 
it unquestionably proves these two things: 

1st. That though all power was absolutely said to be 
in the Church, in general terms, yet the possession of it, 
and that is, I think, the very power itself, was in particu- 
lar hands only: And, 

2d, That they were presiding Elders only, and that 
is, in our Enquirer's own application of it above, they 
were clerical Presbyters at least, and consequently the 
Lay-brethren, in Firmi Han's opinon, had no, share of it; 
and therefore upon the whole matter, this latter quota- 
tion, I conceive, does no, ways prove the thing it was 
brought for. 

* See Enq. p. 61. 

t Omnis potestas et gratia in Ecclesia constituta sit, ubi president 
majores naii, qui et laptizandi et manum imponendi et ordinandi 
possident potes latem. Ep. 75. ut simr^. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 241 

To sum up this present argument then, Origen and 
St. Cyprian did unquestionably own, that true Bishops 
in the primitive Church appropriated the power of the 
keys to themselves, and that warrantably and orthodoxiy 
too. Tertullian and Firmilian, the two only fathers 
here quoted to entitle all the brethren to a joint interest 
in them, appear to have meant no such thing, in those 
passages of their works, which this learned author had 
so carefully fitted out for it; and therefore I may leave 
the reader to judge, from what groundless and unfair 
premises he has drawn this fundamental inference, upon 
which all that follows in this chapter depends, namely, 
* that the porter of the keys was so lodged both in Bish- 
ops and people, that each had so?ne share in it; and as he 
distributes it, the Legislative, Decretive, or Judieatorial 
power, was held in common between Clergy and Laity; 
and the formal Executive power only, consisting mere * 
ly in pronouncing sentence, or the empty ceremony of 
imposing hands, was allowed peculiar to the Clervy. 
How he has proved antiquity to agree with him in all 
this, you have seen already; for this general thesis of 
his has no other of the ancients to vouch for it, f than 
what you have heard just now. Some particulars fol- 
low, for better security to the lay-brethren, of their share 
in this common stock of this Ecclesiastical power, which 
it will be expected I should consider in.order as they lie. 

1st, Then, that the Laity were judges and sharers 
with the Clergy in the judicial power of the Spiritual 
Court, he tells us, does most evidently appear from what 
he reads in f Clemens Romanus's first Epistle to the Co- 
rinthians, I shall briefly state the subject that holy 

* See Enq. p. 115, 
tEnq. U6. 

2U 



242 AN ORIGINAL DKAtTGirr &T 

father was upon, and then recite the words of this quo* 
tation. The Church of Corinth was fallen into a miser- 
able faction. * A few giddy and audacious men had stir- 
red up the meaner sort against their betters; a crew of tile 
and ignorant wretches, as the Holy Father styles them; 
had got a head against the men of wisdom and reputation 
in the Church, and were for turning cut the Presbyters, f 
who had been duly placed over them, and had faithfully 
discharged their Ministry amongst them. The peaceful 
Clement affectionately bewails this; exhorts the heads 
of those seditions to peace, humility, and Charity, with 
an Apostolic spirit indeed; for many pages together con- 
jures them to prefer the public interest before their own; 
and, in the end, goes so far, as to X recommend the 
great example of Moses to them, that as that meekest 
saint on earth had consented that his name should be 
blotted out of the book of God, rather than the peopb who 
had sinned so presumptuously against him, should be 
consumed by him. So he advises the unhappy authors 
of that fatal faction, to imitate, if possible, || this super- 
lative perfection, and wishes each of them, singly for 
himself, to make this heroic declaration in the audience 
of all. § If this sedition, strife, schisms, are upon the ac- 
count of me, I withdraw, I go whither you will, and am 

^QXiyaTTpovuxa irpo-ne^Yi mi avOaSrj — tTrvytpdrjcrav 01 ajipoi zm ray tvlm^ 
01 adot-oi $m evSo&s, o\ a<ppovss trci rsj fpovipms. Clem . epie. ad Corinth, 
prima, p. 2, and p, 5, edit. Oxon. 1633. 

t 'Ems vjxug yelayayeje kclXCjs iroXi^evofxiVHseK Tijg aiiijiT:']^ av'Jotg rt- 
jifirifiiym hulvpyias . lb. p. 58. 

Jib. p. 68.69. ,, 

j| 'AvvTrep6\wT3 TiXztOTrj^og, lb. 

$ Ei Si t[xi ra°^ *°* £ , 0£ S Ka h <rX tff P a 7<* £K%«/>u>, airiipi, I lav Pu\rj6e, kcl 
ttoiw ra Trposacaojxzia vtto tu ir\r}Qtt$. jiovov to itoIjxviou t3 Xpi$5 up7ivtv7<& 
fii^a twv Kadi^ajjuvcov -rrpi^Sv'Jepwv. lb . 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 243 

ready to do whatsoever the ru irAStfos, the multitude, the 
majority, the people, English it as you please, shall order 
to be done; so the flock of Christ may live in peace with 
the Presbyters who are set over them. Now the T d <apo$ao- 
c6[xtvva wb r» irAjffos here, that is, the conditions this incensed 
multitude would insist upon in this case, how unreason- 
able soever; before they would be quiet, our learned au- 
thor offers to us as an act or precept of a regular power 
invested in them; and that all who loved peace in that 
Church were obliged to do what they thus required to be 
done; for he quotes these words alone, as a proof of the 
people's authority in a consistorial capacity: And me- 
thinks, if this be so, then in the example which the Holy 
Father here proposes for their imitation, it must be taken 
for no more than an act of justice and duty in holy Mo- 
ses, to consent to have his name blotted out of the book 
of God, to save the wicked Israelites from a just punish- 
ment of their sin; for to me the comparison plainly seems 
to lie there, and to. import no less. Besides, I cannot 
but take notice that the word n\%do S in this place is a 
very extraordinary term to express the laity of any 
Church by, in contradistinction to the Clergy of it, and 
much less the laity in consistorial council together, as 
the application of it here must imply. I am sure, it is 
the very same word that Clement expresses the idolatrous 
rebels by, in the case of Moses's controversy with them 
just before; and I am apt to think it would be no hard- 
ship upon them to translate it a tumultuous multitude or 
rabble, in the circumstances we find it here, and much 
more agreeable to the vile and sordid character which 
Clement himself, you see, gave us of them just before. 
After this evident proof, as the Enquiry calls it, from 
Clement's Epistle, the subject runs low, and seems to be 



244 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT Off 

exhausted. For to * teli us that Origin describes a crim- 
inal as appearing before the whole Church or congregation; 
and that Dionysius of Alexandria should say the like of 
Serapion, and that no one ever took any notice of him, is 
such a singular way of proving, that all persons present 
sat with a judicial authority in the Church, as would 
make every individual person, even women or children, 
a magistrate, who in any capacity were a proper member 
of either sacred or civil assemblies. The force of such 
arguing, if there be any force in it, has been at large 
considered upon sundry occasions before, especially in 
the second chapter; and therefore I may leave it as I 
find it here. 

AH the rest upon this head are only quotations from 
St. Cyprian again, whom he f affirms to be more full in 
this matter,. of the judicial power of the Laity in the spir- 
itual court, than any he has named before. And who 
can help observing here? 

What a paradox it is in this learned author to bring 
St. Cyprian's authority for a popular jurisdiction in the 
Church, when he had so freely owned but £ just before, 
that Cyprian was of Origen's opinion about the power of 
the keys? Both agreeing, that primitive. Bishops appropru 
ated the grant of them to themselves, and were very orlho~ 
dox in doing so. From whence it must follow also, in 
the second place, that no personal condescensions in St. 
Cyprian's practice, upon which the Enquirer's argu- 
ments all along run, can amount to any proof in this 
matter before us, unless we will make the self- consistent 
martyr not to believe and act alike; which is very hard 
indeed, 

•Enq. p. 116. tEnq. p. 116. 

X Enq. p. 114, " \ > 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 245 

And yet, since two or three passages in that eminent 
father's writings are offered to us, after this, with a pecu- 
liar air of plausibility in them, I will fairly represent 
them, before 1 leave the subject. 

1st, then, we are * told of the great difficulties St. 
Cyprian had to win his people's consent to the absolution 
of some penitent schismatics; and, it is true, he had a 
very affectionate conflict with them in the case; but for 
what? Was it to gain their authoritative vote as fellow- 
judges with him, and without whose concurrence he 
could not do it, as is here pretended? Three or four par- 
ticulars in St. Cyprian's relation of it sufficiently shew 
the contrary. 1st, He calls it their patience in the case, 
which he had so much trouble to persuade them to, as the 
Enquirer's quotation, noted in the margin, shews, which 
is a very extraordinary word indeed, to express an au- 
thoritative suffrage by. 2d, In the foregoing paragraph, 
St. Cyprian tells Cornelius, that \tlie people were so much 
against the restoring of some of the more profligate schis- 
matics, that for fear of scandal, and endangering oth- 
ers by it, he ivas put to it to know tcho should, or should 
not, be admitted into the Church; and farther adds, ^ he 

* Enq. p. 118. O si posses, frater charissime, isthic iriteresse no- 
biscum, cum pravi isti et perversi de scbisraate revertuntur, videres 
quis rnihi labor sit persuadere patientiam fratribus nostris, ut animi 
dolore sopito recipiendis malis curandisq; consentiant. Vix plebi per- 
suadeo, imo extorqueo, ut tales patiantur admitti. Cypr, Ep. 55. 
$ 17. Edit. Pamel, vel. Ep. 59. E lit. Oxon. 

f Nobis sollfcite exammantibns qui recipi et admitti ad Ecclesiam 
debeiit; quibusdam enim ita crimina sua obsislunt, aut fi aires obsti- 
nate et firmiter renituntur, ut recipi omnino npn possunt. [nisi] cum 
ecandalo et periculo mulloruiii. lb. $ 16, 

JNecutilis aut consultus est pastor qui ita morbidas et contractai 
oves gregi admiscet, ut gregem totupi maii cohaerentis afflictatione cod- 
jaminareU Ibid, 



246 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

should be no profitable or well-advised Pastor, who should 
so mingle the infected sheep with the flock, as to grieve 
the whole flock with a resentment of so much evil amongst 
them. From whence it is plain, not only, that point of 
scandal was the great controversy betwixt him and his 
people; but also, that it was a single Pastor's act and 
deed which might occasion or prevent that scandal; suf- 
ficiently intimating to us, that that single Pastor had the 
power of receiving or keeping out such exceptionable 
schismatics from the communion of the Church; and 
this directly spoken with reference to himself. But, 

3d, And last, to make all clearer still, St. Cyprian far- 
ther tells Cornelius, in the same paragraph where this 
-quotation lies, that * he had actually absolved one and an- 
other of those schismatics through his own tenderness to 
them, though the people stiffly withstood and contradicted 
him. in it,- which shews sufficiently what ke know ho 
might have done to all the resi. 

Weigh these few circumstances together, and judge if 
it were an authoritative consent which St. Cyprian want- 
ed of his people. The whole case suits his settled reso- 
lution indeed, of tenderness and condescension to his 
Diocese, but does not in the least impair the fulness of 
his power. 

2d, We are f told again, that the clerical Presbytery, 
as being more at leisure than the rest, prepared matters 
for the court, wherein the Clergy and Laity together 
were to pass sentence at last. The proof is thus: Some 
eminent schismatics of Novatian's party, begged to be 
admitted to communion with Cornelius again; that holy 

* Uausatq: alius, obnitente plsbe et contradicenle, mea tamen fa* 
cilitate suscepli, lb. 
1 Enq. p. 119. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 24T 

Bishop, * having been personally applied to before, and 
thoroughly instructed in the case, was pleased to call his 
Presbyters together to consult about it; and when he, and 
they, and five Bishops more with them, had concerted 
that matter there, and, as the next sentence, wherein the 
quotation lies, does imply, had absolutely agreed that 
those penitent schismatics should be admitted to commu- 
nion again; then says f Cornelius, what follows was, that 
all which had been done should be notified to the people. 
And why was it to be notified to them? Cornelius is not 
wanting to add the reason for it, that they might see those 
very persons, says he, established in the Church again, 
whom they had a long time seen as forlorn vagabonds be- 
fore, and had lamented their condition. Judge you, if 
this matter had not been thoroughly agreed upon before 
this; and whether Cornelius would have spoken thus of 
the people, if he had wanted their authoritative consent to 
receive the criminals into his Church. And accordingly 
when a great concourse of the people appeared upon this 
notice of the matter, and universal joy and praise to God 
ensued upon it, with tears and mutual embracing of the 
brethren, which in his language indeed, as I have:): else- 
where evidently proved, I think, he called an ingens po- 
puli suffragium, in the close of this relation; that was, 
their joyful approbation of the restitution of them; and 
exclusively of any act of the people at all, he says, in 

* Omni actu a I me perlato placuit contrahi presbyterium, adfuwun.1 
etinra quinq; Episcopi. 

f Quod erat consequens, omnis hie actus populo fuerat insinuandua, 
[so far the Enquiry quotes, and leaves out ibis] ut et ipsos vidertnt in 
Eccltsia constitutos, quos errantes et palabiin !os jam diu viderant «t 
dokbanu Apud Cypr. Ep. 49. Edit. Oxon. 

\ Chap. iii. p. 22. mpra. 



248 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

the same breath, * we commanded Maximus the Presbyter 
to take his 'place again. 

Now, when our learned author had thus settled, as you 
have seen, an equal share of legislative, decretive, or J«- 
dicial power in the Church, the next thing was to shew 
the manner of their executing this power in the solemn 
acts of public discipline. To which purpose he has set 
before us the ordinary form of an Ecclesiastical Consis- 
tory in the primitive Church; wherein, had he assigned 
to the several members of it their respective offices and 
powers, as ingeniously as he had represented the thing, 
we should have found indeed a general scheme of admi- 
rable discipline for preventing any long infection of vice 
or heresy in the Church of God. But one would wonder 
to see what strained constructions he has made of a few 
plain passages in St. Cyprian again, to secure to the Lai- 
ty of the Churches their pretended share in the adminis- 
tration of that discipline. 

Censure, and absolution of criminals, are without doubt 
the two principal acts of Ecclesiastical discipline; and 
to prove, that censures passed by the votes and suffrages 
of the people, as well as of any of the Clergy in the 
Church, he tells f us, St. Cyprian writes thus: Whoever 
was excommunicated, it tons by the divine storages of the 
people. The original words he quotes, are in an Epistle 
to his people indeed; but so miserably pointed, so mis- 
translated and misapplied here, that, to speak the truth, 
I am surprised at it. St. Cyprian wrote to his people a 
zealous letter against the schismatical -Presbyters who 

* Maximum presbyterum locum suum agnoscere jussimus; Cset©ro« 
cmn ingeuti populi suffragjo recepimus. lb . 

tEnq. p 121. Secundum vestra divina suffragia ennjurati. Ep. 
48. ad plebem. Edit. Pamcl. vel Ep. 43. Edit. Olon. f 1. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHtJRCH, &.C. 249 

b&d sided with Felicissimus; telling them that * by God*s 
providence they had met with the punishment they deserved; 
for without my knowledge, says he, and beyond what I 
unshed, and even whilst I said nothing, and excused their 
fault, those confederate and wicked wretches, says he, not 
cast out by us, have of their own accord turned out them- 
selves; convicted in their own conscience, they pronounced 
their own sentence, according to your divine suffrages. 
What can be plainer here, than this, that neither St. 
Cyprian, nor his Clergy, nor his people, had any hand 
in this extraordinary excommunication? It was the schis* 
matics' own act and deed, by a voluntary separation, 
and nothing more in it. But what mean those words of 
the holy Bishop, you will say then, according to your di- 
vine suffrages? They plainly mean, as I just now said, 
and have proved before, what this word suffrage does al- 
most always signify in this holy father's language; name- 
ly, that those self-condemning schismatics had done what 
the people very well approved of, and liked it should be so. 
What sort of translation therefore this learned author 
gave us of this passage, and what a groundless applica- 
tion he made of it, I conceive is pretty clear; and how 
unintelligibly it is pointed also, to countenance that appli- 
cation of it, the reader may see, by comparing the En- 
quirer's short clause of it, with the entire transcript of 
the whole period, which I have joined together in the 
margin. 

This is all the authority offered for the people's judicial 

* De Dei providentia, nobis nee voleutibus, nee optantibus, imo et 
ignoscentibus et tacentibus, posnas quas meruerant rependerunt, ut a 
nobis non ejecti ultro se ejicerent ipsi in so pro conscientia sua senten- 
tiam darent, secundum vestra divina suffngia, conjurati et sceleratide 
Ecclesia sponte se pellerent, 
22 



600 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

power in the censures of the primitive Church. But then, 
2d, To prove they could loose, as well as bind, he * 
assures us, the penitents applied themselves to this Eccle- 
siastical Court of his for their absolution. For, St. 
Cyprian, he finds, amongst other things tells us, that the f 
Life and demeanor of the penitent was to be looked into, 
before he was absolved, and therefore concludes, it needs 
must be, that the penitent offender went to beg his abso- 
lution of the Consistory ; and if that clause, or any con- 
text in the place where it is, warrants such a conclusion 
as that, I must own it is a way of reasoning I cannot 
comprehend; and therefore shall leave it to the more ju- 
dicious reader to make the most of it he can. 

And by the same way of reasoning again, he supports 
all those positive and important assertions of his, relating 
to this matter; namely, that the joint assembly of all the 
Laity and Clergy in the Church had the proper right of 
\ judging the sufficiency or insufficiency of a censured 
person's repentance; the right of || admitting him by de- 
grees into part, or a full communion with the Church; 
the right of § continuing offenders for a longer or shorter 
time in the penitentiary station-, and lastly, a full right or 
power II to assoil or absolve them; insomuch that the im- 
position of the Bishop's and Clergy's hands upon them, 
was a * mere declarative act, and no more than a barren 
form of admitting them to the Church's peace. Now, 
not to trouble the reader with a repetition of what has so 
largely been cleared before, concerning the use St. Cy- 

*Enq. p. 130. 

tlnspecta vita ejus qui agit poenitentiam. Cypr. Ep. 12. Edit. Pa- 
mel. or Ep. 17. Edit. Oxon. $ 1 . 

% Enq. p. 126. || lb. $Enq. page 129. Tib. page 130. 
*Enq. p. 133. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 251 

prian made both of his Clergy and people, as well in all 
causes within bis own private Consistory, as in that emi- 
nent council for trial of the lapsed brethren, from whence 
all that is offered from him, upon these several points, is 
taken and misapplied again, I shall, once for all, shew 
how very different that holy father's judgment was from 
that of this learned Enquirer, in relation to all the main 
points he here quotes him for. And, 

1st, The Enquiry * tells us, that both Clergy and Laity 
were all of them judges in the Ecclesiastical Court, and \ 
that the people as well as the Bishops had each of them a 
negative voice. J St. Cyprian as expressly says, there is 
but one judge in the Church at a time, as Christ's vicege- 
rent there. 

2d, The Enquiry || tells us, the Consistory Court did § 
actually assoil or absolve the penitent. St. Cyprian says, 
Absolution was a remission of sins effected by the Priests, 
and acceptable to God. 

3d, The Enquiry IT says, that imposition of hands by 
the Bishops and Clergy, was a mere formal ceremony , 
declarative only of an absolution passed by the Consisto- 
ry. St. Cyprian says, * The hand of the Priest conduced 
to the purging of the conscience; and where he describes 
the whole course of a censured person's recovery, f if he 

*Enq. p. 112, 113. t lb. p. 117.,. 

JUnus in Ecclesia ad tempus sacerdos, etfad tempus judex vice 
Christi. Ep. 59 . $ 5. Edit. Gxon. 

flEnq.p. 130. 

$ Remissio facta per sacerdotesapud Dominum grata est. Cypr. de 
Lapsis. p. 134. Edit. Oxon. 

IT Page 133. 

*■ Ante purgatam conscientiam sacrificio et manu sacerdotis, pacem 
pimnt esse. — De Lapsis, p. 128. 

f Pcenitenti, operanti, roganti,. potest clementer ignoscere, (Deus) po- 



252 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

repents, says he, does good works, and prays to God for 
it, God can pardon such an one, and what the martyrs should 
request, and the Priests should do for such persons, might 
be accepted of him. 

4th, Whereas the Enquiry * says, that his Ecclesiasti- 
cal Court was to judge of the reality of a censured per- 
son's repentance, and according to their will and pleasure 
they were to continue a longer or a shorter time in the peni- 
tentiary station; St. Cyprian -f says, it was the peculiar 
part or province of the governors of the Church (exclusive 
of the Lay-brethren, to be sure) to order ignorant or over- 
hasty penitents in that matter; for to grant them, says he, 
those things which would turn to their destruction, (that is, 
for those governors to permit them to be absolved before 
they judged they were fit for it) would be plainly to de- 
ceive them, and they would be rather butchers than Pastors 
of the sheep. The office of ordering their absolutions 
sooner or later, and the guilt of an over-hasty absolution, 
is fastened, you see, upon the governors or pastors of the 
Church alone; where must we think then the power lay? 
and agreeable to this, when the martyrs were importunate 
to have some lapsed brethren absolved who were unqual- 
ified for it, St. Cyprian argues, J They could not put the 
Bishops upon that which was against the command of God. 
Why, put the Bishops only upon it? How is the whole 
Consistory forgot in such an important act of their power 

test in acceptum referre quicquid pro talibus et petierint martyres, et 
fecerint sacerdotes. lb. p. 138. 

* Enq. p. 126, and 129. 

f PraBpositorum est, properantes vel ignorantes in st mere, ne qui ovi- 
um pastores esse debent, lanii fiant: ea enim cnncedere, quse in perni- 
ciem vertant, decipere est. Ep. ]7. Edit. Oxon. 

X Ut ab Episcopis contra mania tarn Dei fiat, auctores esse non p°s- 
sunt. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 253 

as this? Sure, if they had had a negative, and it had been 
done amiss, the guilt as well as power would have been 
shared amongst them, and they would not have been 
overlooked. But, 

5th, and last St. Cyprian assures us, that his own 
Presbyters sent to him alone for his authoritative order, 
upon the like occasion with this; for so the Forma, as the 
holy Bishop calls it, plainly does imply; which he imme- 
diately explains thus : * You desired a form, says he, of 
me, in relation to some lapsed brethren, ivho were very 
pressing with you to be speedily absolved; I wrote my mind 
very fully, I think, upon that matter, in my last letters to 
you; and then proceeds to tell them the contents of them, 
which was no less than a positive authority and order for 
them to act by, in absolving some, on such conditions as 
he there prescribed, and leaving others as they were, till 
public peace should be restored again. 

Endless were quotations from that excellent father up- 
on these heads. What part he allowed the Lay-brethren 
of the Church in each of them, I leave the world to judge 
from the few I have produced here, and only hope and 
pray that truth will clear* itself at last, on whichsoever 
side it lies, and be impartially embraced by all the lovers 
of it. 

* Significastis quosdam im moderates esse, et cc-mmunicationem ac- 
cipiendam festinanler urgere; et desiderastis in hac re formam a me 
vobis dare: Satis plene scripsisse me ad hanc rem proximis Uteris ad 
vos factis credo, ut qui libellum acceperunt, Szc. — manu eis in pceni- 
tentia a vobis imposita— cum pace --ad Dominum vemittantur. Ep. 
19.. 

22* 



254 AN ORIGINAL IKRAtfGHT* - OF- 

CHAP. VIII. 

We have heard, at large, the excellent discipline of the, 
primitive Church. Our learned author makes this re- 
mark upon it here, that all those judicial acts were exerted 
in and by every single Parish; which being wholly ground- 
ed upon his own precarious principle, that a primitive 
Church, or Diocese, and a modern Parish, or congrega- 
tion, were one and the same thing, I shall refer the reader 
to what I have said * before in answer to that unwar- 
rantable notion of Congregational Dioceses, and oxAy con- 
firm the authorities, then produced against it, with one 
single instance here; which I take to be a clear proof, 
though nothing had been said before, against that whole 
hypothesis, and the present observation from it. 

The instance is this: f Nepos, a Bishop in Egypt, had 
corrupted most of the Christians about him with the erro- 
neous doctrines of the Millenaries; Dionysius, Bishop of 
Alexandria, goes into that region of Egypt called Arsi- 
noe, where he had done that mischief, and, Nepos himself' 
being lately dead, summoned in the Pre:byters and teach- 
ers of the brethren in the several villages there, together 
with as many of the brethren as were willing to come, to 
hold a solemn conference and public disputation upon 
that subject; and after three days reasoning with them, 
happily brought them off from their mistaken opinions. 

Now, who do we think, were these Presbyters and 
teachers of the brethren in the several villages there, sum- 
moned in by the Dyonysius upon this occasion? And in 

* Vide supra. Cap. ii. 

t 'Ei/ to) ApoivoiiTT] yE.vop.ivos, ivda npb ttoAAS tvto nynoXa^i to Soypa — 
ovyicaXiGCts ms irpe^vjipss kcu 6i8a<JKa\us ru)v iv.Tais KU)jxats aSe\(j)0)v, r.apo- 
v}iav KaL ru)v fis\ojxivu)v a$i\(pu)v, drjpocLa rrjv £%ira<riv . iroiyaaoOai ru Xoyt .; 
rpoelpsipafxtv.. £useb. Hist. Eccl. 1. 7, c, 24., . 



Tim primitive cmincn, lc. 255 

what capacity did they exercise their Ministry in teach- 
ing the brethren committed to their care? Not as Su- 
preme Pastors over the several congregations of them; 
for Dyonysius himself, and the whole Catholic Church 
in that age, ever distinguished such pastors by the prop- 
er name and title of Bishop; and accordingly the late 
deceased Nepos is * so styled here. If they were not 
village curates therefore, instituted and deputed to their 
respective cures there by the Bishop of the neighboring 
city of Arsinoe, and possibly of some others in that Pro- 
vince too, these congregations, or religious assemblies of 
Christians under teaching Ministers, were members of no 
Church at all; for, without a Bishop, all agree they 
could not be so; and that Dionysius, and Eusebius with 
him, should call Bishops by the name of Presbyters and 
teachers of the brethren in villages and hamlets up and 
down the country, is what no modest antiquary, I verily 
believe will affirm. It remains therefore, that they must 
have been Congregational parishes relating to some 
mother Church, where their Bishop resided; and conse- 
quently no one of them was an entire particular Church 
in the sense of antiquity, or could exercise judicial acts 
ofEcclesiaitlcai discipline within themselves; for St. Ig- 
natius' maxim is owned by this learned Enquirer f him- 
self, and by all the ancients with him, that without the 
Bishop it was not lawful to do any thing. 

What follows, is a just account from aatiquity of the 

admirable harmony and mutual correspondence of every 

particular Church with one another in those primitive 

times; which was so blessed a precedent of unity indeed 

* m™s tiri^KOTTQs ro)v ko] 1 AfyvnTov. — Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 1. 7. c . 24, 

f Ovk i%6v z$iv — avayicaiov t?iv avev tu tmcKOirs pitftv irpdcativ, Ehq„ 

p. 17. 



256 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT "OF 

throughout the Catholic Church, as every succeeding 
age, how degenerate soever, must have a veneration for, 
and all good men must lament the fatal breaches which 
uncharitable schisms have made in it since; and with a 
holy, though hopeless emulation, I am afraid, in these 
divided times of ours, must wish and pray, at least, to 
see such heavenly concord in the Churches upon earth 
again. Yet, however irrecoverable so great a blessing 
may seem to be ; let every disciple of the peaceful Jesus 
so far contribute to it still, as to ask his own heart, with 
all the strictness and sincerity he possibly can, what oc- 
casion he, in particular, has given for so miserable a 
change; by which means he may happily find a way to 
acquit himself, at least, which would do no small com- 
fort to him, though, for the present, he has but little far- 
ther hopes in view. 

The rest of this Chapter treats of intercourse and go- 
vernment of the primitive Churches by Synodical as- 
semblies; the proper members of which assemblies, the 
Enquirer tells us, were * Bishops, Presbyters, Deacons, 
and deputed Laymen, in behalf of the people of their re- 
spective Churches. Though a little after, he f says 
again, that Firmilian's yearly synods were rather mere 
clerical convocations ; and consisted of Bishops and Pres- 
byters only However, to prove that all those orders 
of men were members of a primitive synod, he produces 
two passages from Eusebius, which make it not unlikely 
that some of each of them might be present at the coun- 
cils he there refers to. And, 

1st, In the great council of Antioch, which condemned 
Paulus Samosatenus, there were present, * says he, Bish- 

*Enq.p. 143. 1 Ibid. p. 148. 

f>Enq. p. 143.. Ex. Epist. Synod.. Apud Euseb. 1..7. c. 30. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 257 

ops, Presbyters, Deacons and the Churches of God] by 
their lay-representatives, as he explains it, because, in 
the synodical Epistles which the fathers of that council 
sent to the Christian Churches abroad, after the council 
was over, they sent the joint salutation of all of them, to- 
gether with their own. And, 

2d, * when the heresij of the Montanis!s was fixed and 
preached, the faithful in Asia, says an anonymous author 
in Eusebius, met together several times to examine it; and, 
upon examination, condemned it. 

The argument from the former of these authorities is 
plainly no more than this. There were, probably, pre- 
sent in that council of Antioch, some of all those orders 
of men; therefore they were all there as proper members 
of the council. 

Now, to be really present in any court or council, and 
to have a right of membership and session there, are, 
doubtless, very different things. And, to judge aright 
where this difference lies in the present case before us, 
let these few particulars be considered. 

1st, That Bishops were so absolutely necessary and 
essential members of the primitive councils, that a conven- 
tion of Bishops and a primitive council, in the familiar 
language of the ancients were convertible terms. And 
this our learned Enquirer is very sensible of, who f tells 
us, from Eusebius, that Polycartes presided over a synod 
of Bishops, which was no other than the great council 
of lAsia assembled about the controversy of keeping 
Easter. And, in X another place he says, Privatus, 
Bishop of Lambese, was deposed by a synod of ninety 

* Enq. lb. 

tEnq. p. 145. Euseb. Eccl, Hist, 1, 5, c. 23. 24. 

JEnq. p. 105. m < 2 ! ^ 



258 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

Bishops. In both which places, it is manifest, a conven- 
tion, or synod of Bishops, and a primitive council, were 
one and the same thing; and it were endless to produce 
instances of this kind. The ancients, therefore, bear 
sufficient witness, that Bishops were necessary, at least, 
if not the only members of a primitive council. Whereas, 

2d, No passage in antiquity, I have ever heard of, af- 
firms so much, in either respect, either of Presbyters, 
Deacons, or people, how often soever we may [hear of 
them, as being present at them; nor do I think our dili- 
gent Enquirer could have overlooked it, had there been 
any such passage to be found; and sure it is, he offers no 
such thing. 

This express evidence, therefore, of antiquity on the 
one side, and entire silence on the other, gives a fair oc- 
casion to distinguish who were necessarily present, and, 
who occasionally, or prudentially called thither; especi- 
ally, if we consider in the third and last place, 

3d, That whosoever were present in any primitive 
council, the whole right of vote, or suffrage, in passing 
any acts or canons there, was peculiar to the Bishops 
alone. And this our learned Enquirer has made clear 
to my hand in one of the most eminent instances, which 
the writings of the ancients can afford us. For in the * 
page just referred to, he tells us, the office and duty of a 
Moderator in a synod was, amongst other things, to take 
the votes and suffrages of the members of the synod; and 
last of all, to give his own; as is evident, says he, in the 
proceedings of the council of Carthage, which are extant 
at the end of St. Cyprian's works. Cyprian being mod- 
erator, sums up all, telling the synod what they had heard; 
and that nothing more remained to be done, but the de~ 

* Enq. p. 145, 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 259 

duration of their judgment thereupon. Accordingly the 
Bishops gave their respective votes and decisions; and 
last of all, Cyprian j as President gave in his. 

In this account you find, 

1st, That St. Cyprian, as moderator, took the votes 
and suffrages of the members of that council; and if St. 
Cyprian's own authority may be taken, they were Bisk, 
ops only, whose votes and suffrages he took there; and 
therefore Bishops only, in the Enquirer's account, were 
members of it. The proceedings of the council, at the 
end of St. Cyprian's works, which this author appeals 
to, manifestly prove as much. * At the opening of the 
council, we find there, some few learned letters were 
read, containing the full sense and substance of the con- 
troversy they met about, as any one who pleases to pe- 
ruse them will quickly see. As soon as those letters were 
read, St. Cyprian, the moderator, addresses to his fellow 
Bishops to this effect: You have heard, my beloved col- 
leagues, says he, what has been written on one side and 
the other. And now what remains, is only this; that 
each of us, the Bishops here present, for so the context 
obliges us to read, do give in cur respective votes and 
suffrages, or declare our opinions in the case, which ac- 
cordingly the Bishops there present immediately did, be- 
ing in number 87; and their suffrages alone, so obtained 
and given, as I have shewn you now, are recorded by 
St. Cyprian himself, as the whole of that council. And 
what room is left here, for any order of men, there pre- 

J Cum in unum convenissent, et lectae essent liters, Cyprianus 
dixit; audistis, collegae dilectissimi, quid raihi Jubaianus Co-Episco- 
pus noster scripserit, et quid ego ei rescripserim — lectae sunt vobis et 

alia; Jubaiani literae superes.t, ut de hac re, singuli quid sentia- 

mus, proferamus. Cypr. in Exord. Cone. Carthag. A. D. 256. 



260 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

sent, to have any part or interest in it, besides the Bish* 
ops cnlyl 

Nor does our Enquirer's own representation of it im- 
ply less than this. St. Cyprian, says he, in summing up 
all, told the synod what they had heard, and called upon 
them, that is, upon the synod again, to declare their judg- 
ment; and how did this synod, which were surely all the 
members of it, declare their judgement in the case? Why, 
the Bishops accordingly, says he, gave their respective 
votes and decisions, and last of all , Cyprian gave in his. 
Can any thing be clearer, than that the Bishops alone are 
owned in this account to be the whole Synod, to whom 
alone their President applied himsef for votes, and that 
no others gave in any? 

And if this eminent council, which I may justly call 
the brightest precedent of primitive synods, within the 
times prescribed by the Enquiry, had Presbyters, Dea- 
cons, and a great part of the people present at it, and yet 
the Bishops only were addressed to under the name and 
title of the synod, had the sole right of suffrage, and de- 
termined all there; what would our learned author gath- 
er more from * Eusebius's account of the council at An- 
tioch, which condemned Paulus Samosatenus, supposing 
that historian had plainly said, that all those orders of 
men were present there also, both at the time of debate, 
and when the sentence passed too? Why should we 
think they proceeded otherwise there, than the practice 
of synods in those times appears to have been, by the ev- 
ident example of St. Cyprian's council now mentioned? 
The reason of the thing itself must incline us to believe 
they did, and no particular reason is offered to make us 

* Euseb. H. E. 1. 7. c. 30. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 261 

think otherwise. Though, after all, the quotation from 
Eusebius, wherein the Churches in general terms, as 
well as Bishops, Presbyters and Deacons, are named, is 
no part of any Synodical act, or so much as of a debate 
in that council, but barely a part of the formal salutation 
in the Synodical Epistle sent by the Fathers of the coun- 
cil to the Catholic Churches abroad, after the council 
was over; and * the Enquiry quotes it as such, wherein 
those venerable prelates, who, in the sense of antiquity 
were the proper "j* representatives of the Churches they 
presided in, sent the salutation of their respective Church- 
es to the sister Churches in all other parts, together with 
their own. By which the historian himself so little un- 
derstood them, or any lay-representatives of theirs, to 
be proper members of that council, that when he speaks 
expressly of the first meeting of it, it was a convention of 
Bishojhs, as he tells us, who assembled at Antioch, to 
suppress that open enemy of the Church; and no other 
order of men does he make mention of, as belonging- to 
that council. His words are these. ^ Dionysius, Bishop 
of Alexandria, by reason of his old age, sent his suffrage 
hy a letter to them; hut the rest of the Pastors of the Church, 
es, that is plainly such as Dionysius was, || came together 
therefrom every quarter to oppose that destructive ravager 
qf the flock of Christ; and when he mentions the last ses- 
sion wherein Paulus was actually condemned, he calls it 

* Enq, p. 143. 

fEcclesia in Episcopo. Cypr. Ep. GQ. § penult. 

J'O KaT AXiidvhiav Aiowviog yrjpag aijiaaafxevos — tit zm?o\r,s rj]v av^u 
yv<L[jLr)V TTapafrjcas. 0/ Si \oiirot twv iKKkrjutwv Tlai/xives aWog a\\o$£v w( 
vte\vfxt(ava rrjs th Xpt^y TrotfAVris avv'iscav. Euseb. Eccl. Hist . J, 7. C. 27. 

Q TiXivtaiag cvyKpo'Jrjdeia^ tt^elovwv bacov i-icuzTruv Hvvoh KaJaywOuf 
ttk RaBoXiWS eiacXricrias tKKijpvrlzTai lb. cap, 29. 

23 



262 A3S ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

a synod of innumerable Bishops, which met there, and cast 
him out of the Catholic Church. This was Eusebius's Anti- 
ochian council, which deposed Paulus, and no others 
mentioned to concur with them in it. 

The other authority from the same historian will soon 
appear to be much the same with this. The faithful in 
Asia, says ananonymous author cited * there, met togeth- 
er to examine and condemn the growing errors of the Mon- 
tanists. Now the [ ot mso)] or the faithful here mentioned, 
must not be understood, I conceive, in the peculiar and 
appropriated notion of them in the primitive Church, by 
which they signified only f the highest station of the 
Christian Laity, admitted to all the mysteries of it; for then 
those Asiatic Synods would have had neither Bishops, 
Priests, nor Deacons in them, which I presume is not 
pretended; they must be taken therefore in the more gen- 
eral sense, for true arid Orthodox believers: in opposition 
to Infidels on the one hand, as our blessed Lord uses that 
distinction, Jo. xx. 27. and of heretics on the other, as 
the distinction between the Montanists and them, and re- 
quire them to be understood indeed in this present quo- 
tation; and then what sort of evidence is given here; to 
prove that this or the other order of Christians acted with 
synodical right and authority in those assemblies; or in- 
deed to prove what particular orders of them were present 
there, by telling us only, that true and Orthodox Chris- 
tians met together to examine and condemn the heresies 
of the Montanists? Which is all that anonymous author 
says of it. 

To strengthen these authorities, from Eusebius, we are 

* Euseb. H. E. 1. 5. c. 16. 

i See Dr. Cave's prim. Christian. Part. 1. c. 9. p. 219. Edit. 3, 
in 8to . 1C76. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 263 

* put in mind again of that eminent council, which St. 
Cyprian so often promised to call, as soon as the Church's 
peace was restored, about the case of the lapsed; assur. 
ing his people again and again, f that Bishops, Presbyters, 
Deacons, and the standing laity should all be present at it; 
and farther, that the Martyrs, Confessors, and whole body 
of the Clergy of Rome highly approved of such a general 
Convention upon that occasion. And why such careful and 
repeated assurances, one would be apt to say, of calling 
all those orders of men to that particular council, if all of 
them had a right of session in every council, of course? 
Or why such signal notice taken of the. Roman Martyrs? 
Confessors, and whole Clergy's approving so much this 
wise proposition of the venerable Bishop of Carthage up- 
on that occasion, if he could not hold a synod without 
them? These very circumstances would incline a man 
to think, that all those orders of Christians were not the 
ordinary and necessary members of every Ecclesiastical 
synod; but that something extraordinary made it advisa- 
ble to have them present then; and that St. Cyprian 
himself assigned such a peculiar reason for it, is observ- 
able wherever he made mention of it; and because the 
Clergy of Rome, whose authority is here quoted, not only 
confirm, but farther explain that reason of his, I shall 
briefly shew you their declared opinion of it, as being 
one and the same with his. 

They approved St. Cyprian's whole scheme, as they 
X tell him of that great council, in so momentous a case, 
upon account of a double advantage of it. 

*Enq. p. 143. t Ibid, p. 144. 

\ Quamquam nobis in tarn ingenti negotio placeat, quod et tu ipse 

txactasti prius perquam enim nobis et invidiosum et onerosum 

rldetur, non per multosexaminare, quod per multos commissum vide- 



264 AN OKIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

1st. Because it seemed a hard matter to them, how so 
great a number of persons, as were likely to appear crim- 
inals in that case, could duly be examined , without a 
great number assisting in it. And, 

2nd. Thai it would he an invidious thing in their opin- 
ion also, for any one single person to pass his sentence 
upon criminals in so universal a cause as that was, where- 
in the tohole loorld, in a manner, was concerned as well as 
himself; and that swh a private decree, without the con- 
currence of more wU2 him, would scarcely be thought au- 
thentic enough in so very public a concern. 

In which declaration these particulars seem clear. 
1st. That the Roman Clergy conceived, St. Cyprian 
must either try the lapsed brethren of his Diocese, by a 
private consistory of his own, or else in a public council 
convened for that purpose. 

2d. That if he had. tried them the former way, then he 
himself had been the one only judge in the case; for what 
other sense can be made of their unum sententiam dicere, 
here urged as an invidious thing, in case he had not call- 
ed a council for it? where I desire the reader to take no- 
tice, by the way, how plainly these Roman Clergy place 
the whole judicial power of a Diocesan consistory in a 
single person, that is, in the Bishop alone. 

But thirdly and lastly, They therefore approved his 
whole design of calling so numerous • a council, both of 
his own Clergy and people at home, and of as many 

atur; etunum sententiam diceie, cum tarn grand e Crimea per multos 
diffusum notetur exisse; quoniam nee firmum decretum potest esse, 
quod non plurimorum videbitur habuisse consensum; aspice totum or* 
bem pene vastatum — et idcirco tarn grande expeti concilium quam 
late propagatum videtur esse delictum, Cypr* Ep. 30, $6. Edit. 
Oxon. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, kC. 265 

Bishops as could be got from abroad; because, not only 
the examination of so many criminals would be managed 
with greater ease and less envy, if all the brethren were 
present, and assisted the Bishops in it, (which plainly 
shews they argued upon no right belonging to them 
there,) but likewise the decree and censure, which should 
pass upon the offenders at last, would be more firm and 
satisfactory to the whole Christian world, who had so 
great an interest in it; because it would not be the decree 
or sentence of one only Bishop then, as it must have 
been in the pother case, but would have the consent of 
many; that is, of many such as that one was; for the 
word plurimorum in the latter clause, is set in plain op- 
position to the unum in the former. By which it appears, 
what an entiie synodical right and power this Roman 
Clergy attributes to the Bishops in that council, and 
what an occasional and prudential reason they assign for 
so many others being present there also; which agrees 
with St. Cyprian's own account of the same council; 
who, as often as he wrote about the vast number of the 
lapsed, the importance of that case, and the public inter- 
est of all the Churches in it, assured his people and all 
his correspondents, that every order of the Church should 
be present at the solemn trial of those lapsed brethren. 
But when he acquainted Jubaianus, how that trial was 
carried on, he expresses himself only thus: * A numerous 
assembly of MS Bishops, says he, met after the persecution 
was over, and such moderate decrees we passed there; and 
if such a number of Bishops in Africa, as he farther re- 

# Persecutione resopita in unum convenimus copiosus et Episcopo- 
Tam numerous, et tempei'amentum libravimus. Cypr. E'p. 55. $ 3 # 
E.lij>. Oxon. 

23* 



266 Aft ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

late the matter, * may not seem to be sufficient, placing 
the sufficiency of the Gouncil, you see, in the number of 
the Bishops there, me wrote also to Cornelius of Rome, 
who, holding a council with many of Ms fellow Bishops, 
fully agreed with us. The councils therefore, as such, 
are familiarly styled a pure convention of Bishops only, 
in St Cyprian's language; as we saw they were in that 
of the accurate Eusebius also. Though the learned En- 
quirer has been as careful to conceal this, as his own au- 
thors are clear in it. For quoting many canons from 
St.. Cyprian's works here, he barely tells us, that such 
and such things were declared in synods; and notwith- 
standing St. Cyprian is as clear in telling us, they were 
synods of Bishops who decided them, as that they were 
decreed at all; yet in no one canon which he quotes in 
this place, was he willing we should hear that. As for 
instance, St. Cyprian, in his first Ep. Edit. Oxon. tells 
us, j* it was long since decreed in a council of Bishops, that 
no Clergyman should be trustee of any man's will. The 
Enquirer had occasion to cite this canon, but only f tells 
us [statutum sit] it was so decreed, though [in Concilio 
Bpiscoporuni] in a council of Bishops, be part of the same 
comma; and there are four canons more, quoted in the 
same page, which I do not say the learned Enquirer had 
any necessity to tell us what sort of synods they were 
made by, but he must be sensible himself, by perusing 

*■ Ac si minus sufficiensEpiscoporum in Africa numerous videbatur, 
etiam Roman super hac resciipsimns ad Comeliiim — qui ipse cum 

plurimis Co-episcopis habito concillio consensit. Cypr. Ep. 55. 

$ 4. Edit. Oxon. 

t Cum jampridem in Concilio Episcoporum statutum sit Cypr. Ep. 
1, Ed. Oxon. Pamel. Ep. 66. 

{See Enq. p. 149, 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 267 

the several places from whence he cites them, that in 
St. Cyprian's account they were synods of Bishops only, 
who made them; and therefore I chiefly take notice of 
them for a further confirmation of that Holy Father's 
sense of the synods in his time. 

That Presbyters, more or less in number, were gener- 
ally present with their Bishops in those provincial synods, 
is not to be doubted; that they should all of right be there, 
we may be sure tha necessities of the Churches could not 
admit of; and that there were any stated representatives 
assigned for them, by the usuage or appointment of the 
Church, as necessary members of a synod, we find no 
evidence in antiquity for it. And lastly, that they had 
no right of suffrage in passing any canons or censures 
when they sat there, I think is manifest by what is said 
before. All which particulars considered, seem to point 
out this determination for us, that they came to councils, 
in those primitive times, according as each Bishop of 
the several dioceses in the province chose out some one 
or more of them to be proper counsellors and assistants 
to them, in such synodical debates and consultations as 
should come before them; whose judicious opinions were 
of eminent advantage and considerable weight, (no doubt 
of it,) with the venerable Fathers themselves, who alone 
sat as necessary members, proper judges, and sole le- 
gislators there. 

As to the people's part or interest in all primitive coun- 
oils, because we read they were present in some, I shall 
only observe, 

1st, That their being present only in some, and not in 
all, is a fair argument against their right of session in 
any; for right and claim are seldom wanting to them- 
selves, and popular rights, the least of any. Yet how 



268 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

often we hear nothing of them amongst the many Synods 
we meet with in antiquity, their greatest advocates must 
be very well aware of. And, 

2d, Where we hear the most of them, there are spe- 
cial reasons given for the particular occasions of their be- 
ing there, and such as little related to the essence or con- 
stitution of the council itself; for such, we find, St. Cy- 
prian and the Roman Clergy gave for the standing Lai- 
ty's coming to that extraordinary council, where their 
lapsed brethren were to be tried. And, 

3d, Though this learned author has produced two or 
three instances where Lay-brethren were present in the 
primitive councils, and we have seen what sort of instan- 
ces they were, yet in his general account of them, which 
is more material by far, you may remember he told us 
from the great authority of Firmilian, that the eastern 
Synods of those times consisted of * Bishops and Presby. 
ters, who met every year to dispose those things which were 
committed to their charge; and can we think that excellent 
father could be so defective in his account of St. Cyprian, 
or so injurious to all the Laity of those Churches, as to 
give no intimation in the least of their meeting with the 
rest; if either personally, or by representatives, they 
were members of those Synods, as well as any of the 
others who met there? 

To close this point then, since we neither meet with 
the name nor notion of Lay -representatives in any Synod 
of the primitive Church; nor any foot-steps of a claim 
of right, pretended by the pzople, to sit and act in the 
councils of those times; nor so much as a single father 
bearing witness to any such right invested in them; but 
barely read, that in some particular councils, Lay-breth- 

•SeeEwq.p. 148. 






THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 26 9 

ren were present, which is accounted for above, and in 
the most we read of, they are not so much as mentioned 
at all; and no where affirmed, that they either came or 
acted in a true synodical capacity there. Since antiquity, 
I say, goes no farther than this, I must take leave to dif- 
fer from this learned Enquirer here, who has * placed 
such members in the provincial Synods of those times, as 
the Synods themselves no where owned for -proper mem- 
bers of their body, under this modern title of deputed 
Laymen, in behalf of the people of their respective 
Churches- 

There are other circumstances, relating to these prim- 
itive Synods, wherein this learned author and other anti- 
quaries do not agree; but they are less material, and may 
the sooner be dismissed. 

And 1st, As to the extent or first division of Ecclesi- 
astical provinces, he j* concludes that depended wholly 
upon the mere conveniences, or accidental circumstances 
of the Churches they consisted of; whereas approved an- 
tiquaries assign a more regular origin of them. The 
judicious Du Pin's opinion is, that % after the Apostles' de- 
cease, the Christian Church did of course, as from the 

* See Enquiry, p. 143. fEnq. p. 141. 

J Du Pin speaking of the civil distribution of the Roman Empire, 
Simile aliquid [inquit] in rebus Eeclesiasticis secere Christian!, et sive 
cum ordinandus autdeponendus erat episcopus, sive cum aliqua divisio 
erat in Ecclesia, &c. cum jam non amplius superessent Apostoli, per 
quos haec antea componebantur, urbis metropoleos episcopum adire par 
fuit, idq; paulatim per consuetudinem invaluit, ac tota Ecclesiarum 
distributio ad formam imperii facta est, urbesq ; metropoles, metropoles 
quoque fuerunt Ecclesia, et illarnm episcopus super universam provin- 
ciam polestatem habuit — turn ad ordinandos, &c. turn ad componen- 
da Ecclesiarum dissidia, turn ad convocandas synodos. Du Pin Dis- 
sert. Ecclesia prima de Antiq. Eccl. Discipl,.$ 7. 



270 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

reason of the thing, apply themselves to the Bishop of the 
metropolis y or chief city in that province of the empire, 
wherein they first were founded, in case any Bishop were 
to be ordained or deposed, or any controversy arose 
amongst them] who called together the Bishops of the 
same (civil) province, and jointly managed all those Ec- 
clesiastical affairs which the Apostles themselves had done 
in their life-time; by which means, the distribution of 
Churches, though not by Canon, yet by general custom, 
was quickly modeled after the form of the empire itself. 
The learned Doctor * Hammond proceeds farther, and 
with great evidence of reason shews, that the Apostles 
themselves invested those Bishops of the chief cities with 
a right of regulating the common discipline of all the 
Churches within the peculiar provinces adjoining to their 
Sees. But whatsoever occasion we assign for it, the 
matter of fact, I think, wants no other evidence, besides 
the sixth Canon of the first Nicene council, which ex- 
pressly calls such a peculiar pre-eminence of many chief 
Churches in several provinces of the empire, by the name 
of Apxata Wri f or customs of an ancient standing in tha 
Church; and then canonically decreed them to continue 
so still. These Bishops then of the more eminent cities, 
as Du Pin, you see, observes, did likewise call councils, 
and preside in them too , long before the first general 
council ordered any thing synodically about it; to which 
the accurate Valesius agrees, in his notes upon Euseb. 

* See Hammond of Schism, p. 42. to. p. 54. in 8vo, Edit. Lond. 
1654. 

f Ta apxata 'i^V Kpaju^b), ra tv Aiyvrr'Jca kcil Al6vt] koli Hiv^airoXu, 
(ocnrtp tov iv A.\i%avdpeia eiruTKOirov -nav'Joiv rnjcav £%£</* E\saiav, bttelSi] tcai no 
w Tij Vd>[Arj tmaKorrw tsto avvrjdss *S"'V opo'ius 6e icai Kaja rrjv Av7'0%* tav **** 
WTais aWais eirapxiais TdTrpeoSua owfadat, reus ikkXigiuis. Cone. Nic ,.. 
Can. 6. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 27l 

Eccl. Hist. lib. 5. cap. 23. Where, the historian speak- 
ing of Theophilus Bishop of Csesarea's presidingthe ui 
council of Palestine, he observes upon it, that * the Bish- 
op of Csesarea both before and long after the first council 
of Nice, had the dignity of a metropolitan, so that he pre- 
sided in all the Churches of Palestine, as Bishop of the 
first See; and where it was otherwise, as in Africa it 
often was, there the same privilege devolved of course 
upon the eldest Bishop of the province, as the same Vale- 
sius observes upon f Palma's presiding in the Synod of 
Pontus, because the eldest Bishop there. 

So that our Enquirer's notion of primitive Synods t 
assembling themselves together by their own authority and 
appointment, if he mean so much by it, that every order 
of Christians in his mixed councils of Laity and Clero-y 
concerted that matter together, and by a joint authority 
determined, that a council should be called, as his ac- 
count of it would imply; this is very different, you see, 
from the sense of other antiquaries, who place that pre- 
rogative of calling councils in some peculiar chief Bishop 
in each province of the primitive Church, from the very 
time of the Apostles' decease, as they also do their right 
of presiding there when they met; so that there seems to 
have been no such great concern again at the opening of 
a council about finding out some grave and renowned 

* Caesariensis episcopus ante Conctlium Niccenum, et diu postea, me- 
tropolitan! honorem ac dignitatem semper obtinuit, ita ut omnibns Pa 
lestinae conciliis pra^sideret tanquam primse sedis episcopus. Vales, ia 
loc. 

fPalmam prasedisse ait ob antiquitatis prserogativam . Simplicis- 
aima sessionis fuit ratio, ut antiquissimus epiicopus cseterisprassiderst. 
Vales lb 

\ See al to Du Pin in his 9th f of the forfeited first Hist. Disss rt. 



272 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

Bishop, one or more, to moderate for them, as our learn- 
ed author * conceives, since the person, to whom, O/. 
common custom, that belonged, was known to them alj 
before-hand. And if the observation be made of the Bish. 
ops presiding in the several councils of the three first 
centuries, which either fathers or historians give us any 
account of, I presume it would appear, that these learned 
antiquaries' remarks upon them were just and true. 

What is farther said of provincial Synods, that they 
ordinarily met once a year, at least, and oftentimes more 
than so; that their Canons were binding to the several 
Churches of the province whereof they did consist, and 
to none but them, unless otherwise confirmed; and, 
lastly, that the general end and use of them was for the 
regulation and management of all Ecclesiastical affairs 
within their respective jurisdictions, needs no dispute 
about it, and therefore I shall close this subject and this 
chapter here. 



CHAP. IX. 

Having seen what sort of enquiry has been made into 
the constitution and discipline of the primitive Church, I 
leave it to the reader to judge, how impartially the 
learned author of it has represented them. 

He proceeds, next, to consider the unity of the Church, 
in order to clear up the sense of antiquity in that impor- 
tant point of schism, which is rightly defined here, a 
breach of that unity. 

This enquiry might be short; but, as the case is stated 
to us, we have three or four sorts of unities to enquire 

• Enq p. 144. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 278 

into, instead of one; for Church unity, says he, is to be 
differently understood according to the different accepta- 
tions of the word Church; that is, (as he explains him- 
self) there is one sort of unity pecidiar to the Catholic 
or Universal Church; * another to a Church collective ;\ 
a third, we may say, to a provincial Church, for he $ 
distingtdsheih them also; and lastly, a fourth kind of 
unity belonging to a || particular Diocesan or Parochial 
Church, which terms, you may remember, are all along 
equivalent in this Enquiry. 

These are offered to us for primitive notions of Church 
unity, though not a single instance given of any of the 
ancients who so diversified it; nor do I think all the re- 
cords of the primitive times could afford him one. Unity 
or schism, upon whatsoever occasions the ancients speak 
of them, are represented in uniform terms, and every 
where alike; a Parochial, a Diocesan, a provincial, a 
total or a partial schismatic, is very foreign lan^ua^e 
from any we meet with in the fathers of the primitive 
Church; and consequently such sorts of unity ars so too. 

However, I will consider this ingenious author's singu- 
lar speculations; not doubting but they will all centre in 
the one, true, and individual unity at last. 

He begins with the unity of the Church Universal; 
which, negatively considered, says he, did not consist in 
an uniformity of rites or customs. 

This proposition is so far true, that the Catholic Church 
did not enjoin particular rites and customs to all particular 
Churches; nor, on the other hand, did particular Church, 
es impose their own rites and customs upon one another; 
and, therefore, I see no reason why the unity of the 

*Enq. p. 154. fib. p. 160. 
$Pagel60, !|Pagel62. 
24 



274 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

Catholic Church, and that of particular Churches, should 
be distinguished upon this negative account. In the mean 
time, each particular Church might lawfully impose in- 
different rites and customs upon her own members; as 
this learned author * elsewhere owns; and if they could 
lawfully impose them, then they might lawfully censure 
such as would not comply with them; for contumacy, or 
opposition to the lawful orders of their own Church, was 
a just cauie of censure in St. Cyprian's opinion, and the 
Enquiry f quotes him for it. Now to such as were just- 
ly censured by their own Church, the laws of the Catholic 
Church, we know, denied communion in any part of her. 
So that a contentious member of any particular Church 
might find himself wholly cast out from the Catholic 
Church, though it were for mere non-conformity to in- 
different rites and customs in his own; and therefore this 
indefinite negative, I think, does not hold good, that the 
unity of the Catholic Church did in no wise consist in an 
.uniformity of rites and customs, since it was liable to be 
lost for want of it. But, 

2d, Neither did it consist, says he, in an unanimity of 
consent to non-essential points of Christianity. 

To wave the undefined term of non-essentials, I may 
justly say of this, what I said of the former; though the 
Catholic Church enjoined them not, yet where any of them 
were decided one way or the other, and enjoined to be 
received either by authority of a particular or provincial 
Church; if any member of such Church or Churches 
should break communion, and be censured on account of 
them, the Catholic Church would no more receive such a 
censured person, than she would the former. I will put 

*SeeEnq.Part2. p. 163. 
tEnq. p. 121. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 275 

the case in that very instance which the Enquirer * gives 
us of non-essential points. St. Cyprian, and the African 
Bishops of his province, decreed that heretical baptism 
should not be valid amongst them; this decree was binding 
to the whole province, as the Enquirer owns, where he f 
speaks of the obligation of provincial Canons in general; 
and if binding, then such as would act contrary to it, 
were justly liable to censure; and would the Catholic 
Church, do we think, receive into communion any such 
member, which either St. Cyprian, or any Bishop in his 
province, should have censured for not observing that 
decree of theirs, though the point itself is here acknow- 
ledged to be non-essential? By the laws of the Catholic 
Church, we know they could not. So that the general 
negative seems not to hold in this particular neither. 

But let us see the learned Enquirer's special authority, 
in this case of non-essentials. Justin Martyr, X says he, 
would receive the Jewish converts, who adhered to the Mo- 
saical rites, into Church-fellowship and communion with 
him, if they did it only through weakness, and did not per- 
suade others to it; therefore every one was left to believe in 
those lesser non-essential matters, says he, as God should 
inform them. Now, if every one were so left to God and 
themselves, then why not the Gentile converts as well as 
the Jews in this particular instance? And yet St. Paul || 
tells them, if they should be circumcised, Christ would 
profit them nothing. Nor did Justin himself allow them 
that liberty. The observation of the Mosaical rites there, 
fore was, either not thought a non-essential point, and 
then it is unduly quoted for an instance of it here, or else 
the Church did not allow that every one should believe in 

* Enq. p. 156, f Enq . p. 146. % Enq. p . 155, 
HGaJ.Y.g, 



276 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

those matters as they thought fit, or, if it pleases better 
as God should inform them. So that this instance so little, 
proves the proposition it was brought for, that it rather 
proves the contrary; besides, most men are sensible, I 
believe, that Justin Martyr in that * early age, and f 
peculiar country he lived in, was not swayed by his own 
private judgment in that extraordinary case, but had a 
fair plea of the opinion and practice of the highest au- 
thority in the Church for what he did, which I take to be 
the only true warrant indeed for concluding any difficult 
point to be non-essential; for if every one might do it for 
himself, it is scarce conceivable how the Church of God 
should secure the fundamentals themselves, which are 
committed to their trust. 

How little then the two negative definitions of Catholic 
unity distinguish it from any particular kind besides, ap- 
pears by what has been said. The inference drawn from 
the former is this, % Whosoever imposed on particular 
Churches the observance of their peculiar rites and customs, 
were esteemed not as preservers and maintainers, but as 
violators, and breakers of the Church's unity and concord; 
for so Victor of Rome was, says he, for exacting of the 
Eastern Churches to keep Easter as they did in the West. 

This inference seems carefully calculated for the au- 
thor's own singular notion of a primitive Pariicula r 
Church; and not so much to inform us, (what his example 
shews) that a Church in the West could not impose cus- 
toms on a Church in the East, which none would dispute 
with him as that no Bishop of any Church whatsoever, 
from East to West, could impose their rites and customs 

* Airo?oXwv Madtflw ' Ep . ad Diognet. prope finem. 
t Airo $\auias via$ 7:o\ew$ rm ZvpWj VtS UaXaifivm. Apol. sec unda 
adinit. t See Enq. p. 156. 



tfiffE ittlMfftVE CHtTBCH, &c. 277 

on more congregations than one, because every congre- 
gation, in his opinion, was a particular Church, and al- 
ways should be so. But since this ingenious innuendo 
does, 1st, suppose, that he has clearly proved the primL 
tive Dioceses to have been no more than mere Congre- 
gational Churches, which I take to be sufficiently spoken 
to before; or, 2d, that they could not have been truly 
Catholic or Apostolical Churches, if they had consisted 
of more, which he has not so much as attempted to prove, 
though it might well have been expected from him, I shall 
leave the reader and him to make the best use they can 
of the arguments he has offered for it within the three 
first centuries, and to censure, as they think fit, all the 
celebrated Bishops of the ages immediately following; 
which I make no doubt they freely own to have presided 
over Churches of more congregations than one, and con- 
sequently to have enjoined the same rites and customs to 
be observed in all. 

The inference from the latter negative definition is 
more extraordinary still; * Whosoever, says he, should 
impose tlie belief of non-essential points upon particular 
persons, were in like manner esteemed as violators of the 
Church's unity and concord. For thus, says he, Stephen, 
Bishop of Rome, was condemned by other Bishops, for 
anathematizing Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, because he 
Jield the baptism of heretics to be null and void. 

In this inference you may observe, that the words 
whosoever and particular persons are indefinitely named, 
and in general terms, at first; but in the instance given 
fo'r the proof of it, they are explained by the Bishop of 
one Church imposing his non-essentials on the Bishop of 
another. Now, if the instance explains the full meaning 

* Enquhy, p. 56. 
24* 



278 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

of the author, as it ought to do, then the inference is* 
just, and may pass without exception, and the imposer 
deserves all the hard words of cruelty tyranny, and the 
like, which this zealous Enquirer fixes upon him; and the 
reason is plain, because the one Bishop had no manner 
of jurisdiction over the other; and besides* the Bishop of 
a Church is not looked upon in a private capacity as oth- 
er particular persons are, especially when a foreign Bish- 
op attempts to impose a point of doctrine upon him, 
which is otherwise determined in his own Church. St. 
Cyprian's maxim is peculiarly applicable in such a case, 
the Church is in the Bishop, and the Bishop in the Church; 
at least, it was notoriously so, in the present case between 
Stephen and St. Cyprian; for Stephen's controversy was 
not with * the person of St. Cyprian only, as it is here 
made to be> hut with his whole Diocese, nay his province 
indeed, insomuch as he proceeded to censure all alike, for 
not receiving that non-essential point in dispute between 
them, as he and his Bishops had decreed it at Rome. This 
was tyranny with a witness, and if the Enquirer had 
meant no otherwise than this, as his example and quota- 
tions prove no more, it had been fair to specify his whoso- 
ever, and his particular persons with some note of re- 
striction upon them. But they are left at large, you see, 
that the inference might remain an universal proposition 
still, though the proof of it was in a particular and sin- 
gular case only; to the end that his freedom in non-essen- 
tials might be liable to no sort of check or control, either 

from abroad or at home; insomuch that if a Synod of 

• 

* Stepharius non tantum sententiam suam adversus Cyprianum et 
aynodum Africanum etiam iteratam protulit, sed et ipsum et episcopos 
contraria sen lien tes, abstinendos esse putavit, ut turn Cyprianus turn 
Augustinus disertis verbis testantur. Annal. Cypr. ad A, D. 256,-$ 3* 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 279 

Bishops in any province of the Christian Church, should 
pass any Canon relating to a non-essential point, though 
for the better security of some fundamental doctrine in 
their impartial judgment and opinion of it, as both the 
African and European Bishops plainly did in that case 
we have been speaking of, and should require the sub- 
jects in their respective jurisdictions to consent to it, as 
those Bishops on one side and the other certainly did, 
they must be censured as schismaticai violators of the 
concord of the Church, according to the inference drawn 
by this learned author from his negative definition of 
unity in the Crurch Universal. Notwithstanding we are 
fully assured, that the Universal Church itself did peace- 
ably allow all those celebrated Churches to use that lib- 
erty within themselves, and none but the furious Bishop 
of Rome himself, whom all Christian Churches besides 
exclaimed against for it, did ever think the sacred unity 
of the Church was violated by it. But to proceed to hi& 
positive definition, which is this: 

The unity of the Church universal, says he, positively 
consisted, in an harmonious assent to the essential articles 
of religion, or in an unanimous agreement in the funda- 
mentals of faith and doctrine. This is true; but wheth- 
er the whole truth, is not so clear. 

The unity of the Catholic Church was two ways lia- 
ble to be broken; by heresy, and by schism; so the En- 
quirer * tells us from St. Cyprian, under this very head 
that the Devil found out heresies and schisms to divide 
the unity . Now in opposition to heresies, the unity did 
consist, no doubt of it, in an unanimous agreement in fun- 
damentals of faith and doctrine. And this Irenaeus par- 

* Enq. p* 160. Diabolus haweses invenit et schismata, quibys 
scinderet unitatem. Cypr. de Unit. Eccl. k 2. 



280 AJ? ORIGINAL DRAUGHT Of 

ticularly itteant in the quotation here produced from him? 
as the subject of his whole book indeed implies, which 
was directly written against heresies. But does our learn- 
ed Author's definition tells us wherein the unity of the 
universal Church consisted, in opposition to schism also? 
which was the main motive of his enquiry into it, as he 
says himself, § 1. of this chapter. If the unity of the 
Episcopacy be admitted by him for one of his fundament- 
als, I need raise no farther controversy about it at pre- 
sent; but if he exclude that, as his manner of explaining 
it, and his different use of it afterwards, give us just rea- 
son to think he does, I must take leave to say, his posu 
five definition is imperfect, and appeal to the primitive fa- 
thers themselves, if the unity of the Episcopacy was not 
absolutely essential to the unity of the Catholic Church. 
St. Cyprian, in the same breath, I may say, wherein 
he exemplifies the unity of the Church in the words of 
St. Paul, * one body and one spirit , one hope of your call- 
ing, one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, one God; He adds, 
as parallel to the rest; let no man deceive the brethren 
with a lie, let no man corrupt the truth of our faith with 
any treacherous prevarication, the Episcopacy is one; 
making it a treacherous corruption of the truth of the 
faith, you see, to deny that. And that it was the Episco- 
pacy of the universal Church, and not of any particular 
one, which he so affirmed to be but one, is evident beyond 
exception, by what he immediately says of it, that each 
Bishop held no more than a part of it, though they were 
interested for the whole. 

* Unum corpus, et unus spiritus, una spes vocationis vestrae, unus 

E>ominus, una rides, unum baptisma, unus Deus.— — Nemo fra- 

ternitatem mendacio fallat, nemo fidei ve'ritatem perpida praevarica- 
tione corrumpat; episcopatus est unus. Cujus a singulis in soiidum 
pars tenetur. C'ypr. de Unit. Eccl. $ 4. p. 103. Edit. Oxon. 



.ai. PRIMITIVE CHtrRCH, &C. 281 

But notwithstanding this evidence, which runs through- 
out St. Cyprian's works, and the same principle receiv- 
ed by the whole primitive Church, our learned author 
seems so little to allow this unity of the Episcopacy for 
a common bond of unity to the Church Universal, that 
he mentions nothing of it, you see, either in his nega- 
tive, or positive definitions of it. But, on the contrary, 
to make it patronise his own * singular opinion, that 
primitive schism respected only a particular Church, he 
produces St. Cyprian's notion, under that head, as a cur- 
rent proof of his particular or parochial unity, in contra- 
diction to that of the Church-Universal; though, to make 
it bend to that design, he was obliged to translate the Ho- 
ly Father's words, as he had done oncef before, contrary 
to his plain meaning in them, and the genuine significa- 
tion of them. I will repeat the £ quotation, and let the 
reader judge, The words as he translates them, Enq. 
pag. 166. are these: God is one; Christ is one, the Church 
is one, the rock on which the Church is built is one, A ve- 
ry unlikely preface, you will say, to introduce the unity 
of a single parish Church by! But observe what follows; 
wherefore, says the Enquirers translation, to erect a near 
altar, and constitute a new Bishop, besides the one altar 
and one Bishop, is impracticable. And had St. Cyprian 
said this, one might have thought, indeed, by his speak- 
ing of one Bishop, and a new Bishop, and no more than 
so, this clause of the period ^might have had some refer- 
ence to the unity or schism of a particular Church, and 
for that reason, no doubt, the Enquirer translated it so. 

*E n q. p. 16S. fEnq. c. 2. p. 21. 

J Deus unus, et Christus unus, et una Ecclesia, et ^Cathedra una 
super Petrum Domini voce fundata: aliud altare constitui, aut sacer- 
dotium novum fieri, prater unum altare, et unum fac— — — . 



282 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

But St. Cyprian's words, we see, are Unum Sacerdotium, 
et Novum Sacerdotium, one Priesthood, and a new Priest- 
hood; which are complex terms, and denote not a single 
Bishop, but the entire order of them in the Church, or, 
in his own language, as we observed but now, the one 
Episcopacy, whereof each Bishop held a part. And this 
is that principle of unity in the Catholic Church, which 
the holy Martyr, in this quotation, declares to be so ab- 
solutely one, that he introduces it with all those solemn 
instances of indivisible unity which we find here in the 
same period with it. A plain proof, that no breach of it 
could be made in any single Church whatsoever; but 
the whole Episcopacy was broken, and consequently the 
schism must, ipso facto, extend to the Church Universal. 
In few words, the difference between the primitive 
Church and the Enquirer, in this matter, lies here. The 
Enquirer takes notice only, how that particular Church 
alone, wherein the schism began, had a new Bishop im- 
posed upon them; and therefore seems to see no far- 
ther injury or innovation yet made in the Church of 
Christ besides. Whereas the primitive Church was 
sensible, that there was not only a new Bishop schismau 
ically made in that particular Church, but a new Priest- 
hood, or a new Episcopacy, springing up by means of it, 
which stood in open competition with that one Priesthood, 
or one Episcopacy, derived down to them all from Christ 
and his Apostles, and might, from generation, to genera- 
tion, propagate another pretended Church, distinct from, 
and independant of, the only true one; usurping an equal 
right and title to Scriptures, Creeds and Sacraments, as 
well as a new Priesthood, with the Apostolical succession 
itself, and the authority as good in the one as the other, 
unless they all jointly disavowed the usurpation, and 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 283 

every Bishop of the Church, as soon as they had 
any cognizance of it, utterly renounced all correspond- 
ence and communion with the authors or abetters of it; 
for it equally injured them all. So immediately did eve- 
ry particular schism, without any other intervening act 
in the case, influence the Universal Church, and violate 
the sacred unity of it. 

From whence these two things appear. 

1st. That it was no slight error in the learned Enquirer ; 
to render St. Cyprian's Novum Sacerdotium, by that undue 
translation of a new Bishop, instead of a new Priesthood, 
since it was the main hinge on which the controversy 
turned; and had it been rightly rendered, would have 
discovered wherein the primitive Church and he differed 
about those important points of unity and schism. And, 

2d. That the two only ways, whereby the Enquirer * 
afterwards says, the schism of a particular Church might 
influence other Churches, namely, by admitting excommu- 
nicated schismatics, their Legates, Messengers, or follow- 
ers; or else, by receiving letters from them, and approv- 
ing their pretensions; are of a very different considera- 
tion from the point in question here. For the question 
is not, how other Churches might actually become schis- 
matics, as well as the principals themselves; but how all 
Christian Churches, in the judgment of the primitive Fa. 
thers, were ipso facto injured, and" their Catholic 
unity immediately broken, by a schism breaking out in 
any particular Church, though no other Church besides 
either favored or approved of them. Which was not, you 
see, by 'becoming schismatics themselves, as the Enqui- 
rers argument implies, but by the Schismatics introducing 

Enq. p. 177. 



2S4 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

a new Priesthood or Episcopacy into the Church of 
Christ, wherein they were wholly passive, but univer- 
sally concerned. 

It is true, St. Cyprian very well knew, from the na- 
ture of the thing itself, that every schism must be form- 
ed by some members of a particular Church breaking off 
from their own Bishop, and therefore inveighs against 
that violation of their Spiritual allegiance, and aggra- 
vates the guilt of such a breach, as the necessary cause 
from whence schism must arise, and so much the Enqui- 
rer's several * quotations from him shew; but he produced 
them as plain evidence that schism respected only those 
particular Churches, and no more; whereas, when the 
same St. Cyprian comes to close those discourses, and 
to tell the schismatics how their guilt came to be so great; 
he gives them this reason for it, which the Enquirer has 
transcribed j* amongst tbe rest too, because, says he, the 
Catholic Church, which is one, is not rent nor divided, 
but knit and coupled together by the cement of her Bishops 
united to one another. As if he had plainly said, that 
no schism can be made, but the Catholic Church and 
all the Bishops of it must be injured at once; and this 
plain consequence of revolting from a single Bishop, was 
a sufficient motive for the Holy Martyr St. lagnatius also, 
to lay such frequent and pathetical injunctions upon all 
Christians to obey their respective Pastors, and live in 

* Neque aliunde nata sunt schismata, &c. Hi sunt ortus atq ; co- 
natus schismaticorum, &c. Inde schismata et hasreses obortse sunt, 
&c. SeeEnq. p. 166, 167. 

1 Enq. ib. p. 167. ad finem. Quando Ecclesia, Quae Cathoi- 
ica una est, scissanon sit neque divisa, sed sit utique connexa, et co- 
haerentium sibi invicem sacerdotum glutino copulata. Cypr. Ep. 69. 
Edit. Oxon. 66. §7. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 285 

the unity with them, which the Enquirer * makes a great 
argument again for his primitive parochial schism, 
whereas if the sin of Schism was the consequence of their 
disobedience, which is agreed as well on one side as the 
other; the reason was equal at least, take it in which 
sense we please, for the zealous martyr to warn them so 
affectionately against it; or if any difference, the argu- 
ment would rather look the other way; that their crime 
extended farther than our learned author allows it to do, 
because the Holy Father's injunctions were so frequent 
antipathetical, as he observes them to be. And this can- 
not be doubted indeed, if we remember St. Ignatius' no- 
tion of Ike one altar, which he unquestionably meant, as 
all the ancients did, with reference to the Universal 
Church, as I have shewn before. 

After all, the Enquirer f undertakes to make his The. 
sis clear, beyond exception, by the noted instances of 
Felicissimus' schism in the Church of Carthage and that 
of Novatian at Rome; and to that purpose shews at large, 
that they were called schismatics, and proceeded against 
as such, whilst they neither caused nor attempted any 
separation from any other Churches, but those respect- 
ively of Carthage and Rome; and they very well might 
be so, and yet nothing less injurious to the Universal 
Church, as you have seen already. But let us hear 
what St. Cyprian says of these very schisms, which are 
offered as a pattern for all. Of Felicissimus and his ac- 
complices, says that Holy Martyr to Cornelius of Rome, 
t what manner of persons do you think they must he, who 
are enemies of the Bishops, and rebels against the Catholic 

*Enq. p. 169. fEnq. p. 172. 

X Quales putas esse eos, qui sacerdotum hostes, et contra Ecclesiam 
Catholicam rebelles? Cypr. Ep. 59. $ 5. Edit. Oxon. 
25 



286 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

Church? Did their schism respect himself and his Church 
only, and yet that good man fix so hard a charge upon 
them, beyond what they deserved? No, it was on ac- 
count of his settled judgment in the case, and that of the 
whole Christian Church with him, according to the Catho- 
lie principle we are now speaking of. And of Novatian, 
more plainly still; * he separated himself, says he, from 
the bond of the Church and from the College of Bishops, 
and would neither keep the unity of the Episcopacy nor 
the peace of it. How this suits with primitive schism, 
again, respecting a particular Church only, I confess I 
can not see. 

This, and such like evidence from antiquity pressed so 
hard upon the Enquirer's singular notion, that he found 
himself obliged to fly to these cautious distinctions; f that 
schism, in its larger sense was a breach of the Church 
Universal, but in its u c ,ual and restrained sense, of a 
Church particular. And again, % that schism, principal- 
ly and originally, respected a particular Church or parish; 
though it might consequentially influence others too. And 
again, § that it actually broke the unity of one Church, 
and virtually of alh 

In the first of which distinctions, he owns, you see, 
that schism, in some sense, was a breach of the Church 
Universal-, and in what large sense that should be, if it 
respected no more than a particular Church only, as he || 
affirms of it, is too much for me to conceive. Original- 
ly, indeed, it respected a particular Church, so far, that 

* Qui se ab ecclesias vinculo .atq ; a sacerdotum collegio separat 

qui Eniscopatus nee unitatem voluit tenere, nee pacem. Cypr. Ep. 
55. p. 112- Edit. Oxon. 

t Enq p. 180. JPag. 162. 

* Pag. 173. I,] Enq. p. 168. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 287 

in one or other of them, it must originally break out; but 
that it respected other Churches consequentially only, is 
but the same mistake again, which I answered before, 
that none were affected with it, in his opinion, but such as 
became schismatics themselves. And lastly, how this 
Catholic unity was broken, and not actually broken, is too 
nice for me again. But such uneven ground we may 
expect to meet with, when we leave the plain way. 

I have wondered, I confess, from whence the singular 
way of reasoning in this Enquiry should come; but the 
secret of it, if I mistake not, and I ask pardon if I do, 
seems to lie here; some charitable expedient was to be 
found out to support some sort of schismatics with this 
comfortable hope, that though they broke the unity of 
the particular Church whereof they were members, yet 
they might continue in the unity of the Church Universal 
still; especially, if the points in controversy between 
them were matters only of rites or non essentials; and if 
the unity of the Episcopacy had been admitted for an es- 
sential bond of Catholic unity, as it really was in the 
judgment of the primitive Church, that comfortable expe- 
dient, and this whole scheme of diversity of unities, had 
been lost together; as appears, I think, by the particular 
account I have here given of them. 

I have taken but little notice indeed of his difference 
between the unity of a Church collective, and that of the 
Church Universal; because he had prevented me in his 
own account of that. For the unity of a Church Collec- 
tive, * says he, may have consisted in a brotherly corres- 
pondence with, and affection towards each other; which 
they demonstrated by all outward expressions of love and 

tEnq. p. 160. 101. 



288 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

concord; as by receiving into communion the members of 
each others, mutually advising and assisting one another 
by letter or otherwise, and other marks of love and concord. 
And, on the other hand, the relation, says he, between 
each particular Church, and the Universal Church in gen- 
eral, was this, that as one 'member of the natural body has 
a regard to all the other members thereof, so a particular 
Church had to every member of the Church Universal; the 
Bishops employed a general kind of inspection over all 
other Churches besides their own, observing their condi- 
tion, and giving them an account of their own: and sent to 
one another for advice and decision in difficult points. In 
these, and in many other such like cases, there was a cor- 
respondence between the particular Churches of the Unu 
versal. Now^ where the distinct unity of a collective 
Church, from that of the Universal, lies in this account of 
them; I must leave the reader to enquire, for I confess I 
can discover none. 

And thus having considered the several kinds of uni- 
ties proposed, I may conclude, I think, what I first ex- 
pected of them, that in respect of schism at least, for the 
sake of which this singular diversity was contrived, they 
all centre in that one individual unity, which all antiqui- 
ty attributed to the Catholic Church of Christ. 

One point under this head, is still behind, and so neees- 
sary to be settled, that the subject of the whole Chapter 
is of little use without it. Schism, as our learned author 
has * defined it, was a causeless separationfrom their law- 
ful pastor. This gave him occasion to enquire, what 
causes could justify such a separation, and what not; an 
enquiry, proper on all sides, whether the schism were 
particular only, or an universal one; since schism was a 
certain and immediate effect of it. But, to be clear in 

* Enq. p. 163, 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 289 

this enquiry with him, the principal term in the question 
must first be rightly understood. 

Separation, if it be meant according to the point in 
question here, must imply, not a bare abstaining from 
communion with the lawful Pasto/, but setting up anoth- 
er also in his stead, for otherwise a formal schism was 
not yet made; which distinction I briefly hint to the read- 
er, because, though the question i self does so necessari- 
ly suppose this setting up of altar against altar, as well 
as forbearing to communicate; yet in the proofs and pre- 
cedents offered for it, and in the inference drawn from 
them * at the last, he will find they are promiscuously 
used without this due distinction; whereas it is evident 
by the whole economy and principles of the primitive 
Church, that causes might be given for not joining in 
communion with a Pastor, through some fundamental 
corruption, for example, in the very service of his Church; 
and yet the same persons, who leave him for it, may not 
be authorised to deprive that Pastor, or to substitute ano- 
ther in his place. The necessary requisites for deposing 
or constituting Bishops in the primitive times, as we have 
seen at large \ before, is sufficient proof of this; and the 
leaned Enquirer, in the close of this very head, £ de- 
clares, that it was avouched by all, that Synods- did depose 
all those Bishops that were guilty of criminal or scanda- 
lous enormities. As he owned § before also, that the 
Bishops of the Province were to be called in, at least, 
and their consent obtained, before any Bishop of the 
primitive Church, could be legally instituted, as he calls 
it, or settled in their place. From these considerations 
of confessed matter of fact, it must follow, that the peo* 

* Encfr. p. 166. k 7. t Cap. 3. et 6. supia. 

JKnq. p. 165. k Enq. p. 47, 49. 

25* 



290 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

pie's part in any separation, be the occasion never so jus- 
tifiable, could amount to no more, than a bare abstaining 
^rom communion, till a regular authority should depose 
their criminal Pastor, and provide another for them. 

And if we bear these premises in mind, whilst we ex- 
amine all this learned, author offers upon this subject, we 
shall find it comes to just the same thing: whatever more 
might be intended by it. His whole account of it is as 
follows; 

The justifiable causes,* says he,ybr such a separation, 
1 think, were two, or at the most, three) first apostacy from 
the Faith; secondly, Heresy; and thirdly, a scandalous 
and wicked life. 

His instance for Apostacy, is that of the Spanish Bish- 
ops, Basilides and Martialis; whose relapsing to idola- 
try in time of persecution was notorious; and that the 
people should separate from them, and join in commun- 
ion with others, was approved by St. Cyprian and his 
synod, in that "j* Epistle the Enquirer refers to for it. But 
how stood the case, when the African council thus advis- 
ed them? and how far did the people's part in that separa- 
tion go? Did the people, or any of the inferior Clergy of 
their Churches with them, turn their Apostate Bishops 
out of their places, and, by their own act and deed, sub- 
stitute others in their room? Nothing like it, if you will 
believe the synod itself in that case. For, as they rep- 
resent the matter, in the same Epistle, those idolatrous 
Bishops were synodically deprived, and others, in the 
same manner, placed in their Sees, before the peopleever 
applied to St. Cyprian and his council about communicat- 
ing or not communicating with them; only by the un- 

*Enq. p. 163. 164. 

tCypr. Ep. 68. or 67, Edit. Oxen. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 291 

just interposition of the Bishop of Rome, in favor of those 
idolators after they were deprived, they claimed their 
former right still; and in that case, the African council 
advised and warranted the people to separate from their 
first idolatrous Bishops, and join communion with those, 
who were so regularly provided for them; as I have 
shewn more at large in the sixth chapter foregoing, and 
now a separation , in any case whatsoever, thus manag- 
ed, is justifiable without dispute. And this is all the En- 
quiry proves in the first justifiable cause for it, namely, 
that of notorious idolatry. For what the instance or ex- 
ample proves, is presumed to be the substance of the ar- 
gument, which the author grounds upon it. But, 

2d, What sort of separation he approved of, in case 
of an heretical Pastor, is not so easily to be known, from 
his short quotations under that head; for all he * says of 
it is, that Irenasus advises usf to fly from all heretics; and 
that Origen allows the people to separate from their 
Bishop, ^ if they could accuse him of false and heretical 
doctrine; which no doubt of it, all good Christians ought 
to do. But this is speaking at large. If we would know 
the practice of the primitive Church in this matter, the 
case of P.aulus Samosatenus is as clear a precedent as 
antiquity can afford; and as evidently shews, that the 
separation both of Laity and inferior Clergy from an 
heretical Bishop, was managed in the same manner then, 
as we have seen it was in the case of the idolatrous Bish. 
ops before. The proceedings against Paul are at large 
recorded by Eusebius* and in. the synodical letter of the 

* Enq. lb. 

t Enq. ib. Oportet longe fugere ab eis. Iren. 1. 1. c. 13. 
J Si habueris accusationem doctrinae pessimae, et alienorum ab eccle- 
sia dogmatum. Oiig. Horn. 7. in Ezek, 



292 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

council called against him, which that historian has in 
great part preserved for us; where we read of no new 
altar or second Bishop set up by Presbyters, Deacons, or 
people, notwithstanding they were conscious enough of 
his blasphemous notions, till such time as the great coun- 
cil solemnly deposed him, and promoted Domnus to his 
See, Nay, we find his orthodox people still present at 
the public service of the Church with him, his heretical 
blasphemies not being yet inserted there, though * they 
suffered reproaches from him all thz while, for behaving 
themselves more decently and gravely than his wretched 
flatterers did, as the holy fathers of the council relate 
the case themselves. The separation in this case there- 
fore was managed thus: The watchful Bishops of the 
several Churches of God about him took the alarm of his . 
heresy, and provided a more faithful Pastor in a regular 
and authentic manner for his people, who waited for that 
warrantable course of being duly separated from him; 
trusting to the providence of God, without going out of 
his way, which every Christian safely may depend upon, 
from the faithful promises of our blessed Lord, that he 
will be with his Church for ever. But, 

3d, As to the matter of a scandalous and wicked life 
the learned Enquirer himself, and the venerable authors 
he cites, are divided about the modes of separation in 
such a case. An African Synod, j" he tells us, affirms, 
that the people of their own power and authority, without 
the concurrent assent of other Churches, might leave and 
desert a scandalous Bishop; and Irenceus, says he, agrees 

* Tois ovv (0$ iv o'/kw 0sy ciixvozpzirioc Kai iv^qk]^s axuovoiv e-m'Jiuuv 
kuI £ v>j6pi£iov. Euseb. H, E. lib. 7, c. 30. 

tEnq.p. 164, 165. 



THE PRIMITIVE CIIURCn, &c. 29S 

with them in it, though Origen seems to be of another mind. 

Now, by leaving and deserting their Bishop, of their 
own authority, and without the assent of other Churches, it 
is plain he means no less than a full power in them to 
discharge him of his pastoral care over them, and to pro- 
vide another Bishop or Pastor for themselves; for he sets 
it in direct opposition to Origen's opinion, which in his * 
own construction of it, was to wait for a synodical author- 
ity to depose their Bishop in any such case. 

His meaning being plain then, we shall soon see, or 
rather have seen already indeed, that the African Synod 
he refers to, allows no such popular liberty, of placing 
and displacing Pastors for themselves, in case of a scan- 
dalous or immoral life; for it is the very same synod, and 
the same Epistle of theirs he here appeals to, which he 
cited just before in the case of the idolatrous Spanish 
Bishops; who being not apostates only, but VICIOUS aad 
immoral men too, the Synod considered them in both re- 
spects, in their answer to the Clergy and people of their 
Churches who wrote for their advice about them; and as 
this gave occasion to the Synod severally to declare, in 
many passages of that Epistle, how unworthy either 
vicious or idolatrous Bishops were to minister at the altar 
of God; so it did to this Enquirer also to make a double- 
use and application of it; whereas in respect to the peo- 
ple's separation from one, and joining in communion with 
another, which is the case before us here, the Synod's 
judgment was the same, as well in regard to the immoral- 
ity, as to the idolatry of their Bishops. la both cases 
it had immediate reference to the condition the people 
were in, and the difficulties they were driven to, of hav- 
ing rival Bishops, on one side synodical ly deprived, and 

* Enq. ib. p. 165. 



294 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OP 

on the other synodically set up, and the Synod's determi- 
nation for them was this: That since they had Bishops 
so regularly provided for them, and the other so justly 
deprived, they should separate from the one who were 
guilty of such open idolatry and immoral lives, and join 
communion with the other, who could be charged with 
neither, notwithstanding the Bishop of Rome, and some 
other nearer home, discouraged them from doing so; and 
this was the very separation that Synod had occasion to 
speak to, upon the Clergy and the people's application 
to them; and the only kind of popular election they main- 
tained, which has so mightily been insisted upon, in a 
very different sense, * before. Let the impartial reader 
have recourse to the synodical f Epistle itself, and judge 
if he can find this dispensation granted there to any 
Christian Churches whatsoever, to desert their criminal 
Bishops of their own authority, and without assent of 
other Churches, in such a sense as is affirmed here. To 
proceed then to the other authority for it. 

Irenseus, X sa Y s he, was of the same mind with this 
African council; and I doubt not, but he was; but not 
in the sense intended here. The || passage quoted for it 
from that father, neither implies so much, nor is directly 
applicable to the point in hand, if the learned commenta- 
tor upon it, understood it right. The question before us 
is, what the people are to do in case of scandal and im- 
morality in their Bishops, his faith and principles in the 
mean time being sound and orthodox; but Irenseus, in the 
place quoted here, was speaking of the IT most vicious 

* Enq. Chap . 6. fCypr. Ep. 67. Edit, Oxon . % Enq. p . 164. 
|| Qui vero presbyteri serviunt suis voluptatibus, &c. — ab omnibus 
talibus absistere oportet. lien. 1. 4. c. 44. § 1. 

% Qui vero crediti quidem suDt a multis presbyteri, kc . Annot. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 295 

heretics of those times, such as Nicolas the Beacon, Ce, 
rinthus, Ebion, and the like; as the judicious annotator 
verily believes. This alters the case, and many circum- 
stances would persuade any reader that Irenseus meant 
so. 1st, Because he does not name the Presbyters he 
was speaking of there, as genuine Presbyters of the 
Church, but * such as were thought by many to be so ; 
which character of them the Enquirer was pleased to 
leave out, though in the midst of the first comma he cites. 
2d, Because Irenseus introduces what he says of them, 
with plain terms of distinction from the Presbyters he 
was speaking of before, who were f such as had succes- 
sion from the Apostles, and ivith that succession the cer- 
tain gift of truth, according to the good pleasure of the 
father, as the context shews. And 3d, Because in the 
quotation itself, where he advises all Christians to abstain 
from them, he exhorts them, by way of distinction again 
% to keep close to those, who, as he told them before, pre- 
served the doctrine of the Apostles. Pretty plain signs, 
one would think, that he was speaking of heretics, as 
well as vicious men, though the same persons still, 

And yet, after all, be it of one or the other, or both; he 
says no more, you see, to our present case, than that we 
should abstain from them-, which determines nothing, 
how the Church of God in general should be regularly 

Nicolaum, Cerinthum, Ebionem, et id genus Kseresiarchas hie atro 
carbone notari exist'mo. Ad Iren. ubi supra. 

* Qui vero crediti quidem sunt a multis presbyteri. 

f Eis qui in Ecclesia sunt presbyteris obaudire oportet, his qui suc- 
eessionem habent ab apostolis, et cum episcopatus successione charisma 
verilatis certum secundum placitum patris acceperunt. L. 4. c. 43. 
Qui vero crediti sunt a multis, &c. lb. c. 44, § 1. 

J Ab omnibus igitur talibus absislere oportet, adhaerere vero his qui 
Apostolorum, sicut praediximus, doctrinam custodiunt. lb. cap. 44. 



296 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

freed from such wretched Presbyters, or any particular 
people provided with a more worthy Pastor for them- 
selves; but leaves his reader there to the warrantable 
rules and method of the Church, having taught him just 
before what sort of Apostolical successors all Christians 
were obliged to cleave to; and farther warned him to * 
suspect all others who go off from that succession, and 
hold their meetings in any place whatsoever, as heretics or 
schismatics, or proud, or pleasers of themselves, or else as 
hypocrites who do it for the sake of interest or vain-glory. 
Which gives as little licence, I think, to the people of any 
Diocese, particular Church, or Parish, name it as you 
please, to provide themselves a Pastor of their oiun au- 
thority arid without the assent of other Churches, in the 
sense it is pretended here, as the African council itself 
did before; and so far Irenseus and that council do agree; 
neither of them warranting that popular right and author- 
ity of heaping up teachers to themselves, to use the Apos- 
tle's phrase, however unfortunate they may be, to have 
an immoral Pastor at any time among them. 

And that Origen comes nearer to the sense of both of 
them, than our learned author thought he did, though 
he endeavored to reconcile them too, I believe the reader 
will perceive by the very quotation he gives us from him 
here, which I shall transcribe in his own translation, 
together with the text itself; not only as the true sense 
of the African council and Irenseus, but of the whole 
primitive Church with them; in this point of scandal and 
immorality in any minister of the Church of God. 

♦Reliquos vero qui absistuut a principali successione, etquocunq; 
Iced colliguntur, suspectos habere, vel quasi haeieticos et malae renten- 
tiae, vel quasi scindentes, et elatos, et sibi placentes; am ruisus ut hy- 
pocritas, quasstus gratia et vanae gloriae hoc operantes. Iren. ubi supra, 
oap. 43. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 297 

He * that hath a care of his soul, will not be scandal- 
ized at my faults, who am his Bishop, but considering my 
doctrine, and finding it agreeable to the Church's faith, 
from me indeed he will be averse, but he will receive my 
doctrine, according to the precept of the Lord-, which saiih, 
The Scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses' chair, whatsoever 
Hierefore they say unto you, hear and do, but according un- 
to their works do not, for they say and do not. That Scrip- 
ture is of me, who teach what is good, and do the contrary, 
and sit upon the chair of Moses, as a Scribe or Pharisee. 
The precept is to thee, O people; if thou canst not accuse 
me of false doctrine, or heretical opinions, but only behold- 
est my wicked and sinful life; thou must not square thy life 
according to my life, but do those things which I speak. 

Here Origen must needs be understood, as the learned 
Enquirer f remarks upon him, to restrain the people from 
present separation, till they had the authority of a Synod 
for doing so; and can the African council be said to differ 
from him in this, when all they wrote upon this subject, 
was in the particular case of the Spanish Churches, where 
such a regular Synod had already settled all in the same 
manner that Origen would have it done? Or, supposing 

*■ Qui curam habet vitse suae, non meis delictis, qui videor in Ecclesia. 
praedicare, scandalizabitur, sed ipsum dogma considerans, et pertrac- 
ians Ecclesia? fidem, a me quidem aversabitur, doctrinam vero suscipiet 
secundum praeceptum Domini, qui ait, supra cathedram Moysi sede- 
runt Sciibae et Pharisasi, omnia enim quaecunq;-vobis dicunt audite et 
facite, juxta autem opera illorum nolite facere, dicunt quippe et non 
faciunt. Iste sermo de me est, qui bona doceo, et contraria gero, etsum 
sedens supra cathedram Moysi quasi Scriba et Pharisaeus; praeceptum 
tibi est, O popule; si non habueris accusationem doctrinae pessimal et 
aiienorum ab ecclesia dogmatum, conspexeris vero meam eulpabilem 
vitara atq; peccata, ut non habeas, juxta dicentis vitam tuam institw- 
ere, sed ea facere quae loquor. Orig. Homil. 7. in EzechieJ. 

tEnq, ib»p. 1C5. 
26 



298 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

Irenseus referred to this special case of immorality, which 
it is likely, you see, he did not, could he be said to allow 
the people to provide another Bishop for themselves, of 
their own power and authority, and without the assent of 
other Churches, because he said they should abstain from 
the former? determining nothing for them which way 
they should be better provided for in the case, but plain- 
ly leaving them, as I observed before, to the ordinary 
methods of the Church for that; which, as the Enquirer 
owns, in this very place, was avouched by all to be this, 
That Synods did depose all scandalous and criminal Bish- 
ops; and to understand it otherwise, in Origen's case, says 
he, was to contradict all other writers besides. It were 
hard upon Irenseus then, to say, he did not understand it 
so, who had so strictly charged all Christians, as you 
heard but just now, to keep close to the Apostolical suc- 
cession, to whom the certain gift of truth was so peculiar- 
ly bequeathed, and to be so jealous of all others, who 
would meet any where, without regard to that. 

And thus the three authorities produced agree, I con- 
ceive, in this, that neither one nor the other justify the 
people of any Church, to deprive or set up a Bishop or 
Pastor for themselves of their own power and authority, 
in this last case of a wicked and scandalous life; any 
more than the Catholic practice of the primitive Church 
did in the greater ones of heresy and apostacy itself, 
which we have no where found was done ; and with this 
I shall close the material point oi the justifiable causes of 
separation, and at the same time the general head of this 
last chapter, concerning the unity or schism of the prim- 
itive Church. 

And by the particular survey, which has been taken 
of these two important points, it is no hard matter, I think, 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 299 

to know what schism is, and in every division of the 
Church, who the schismatics are. The learned Enquirer 
indeed, differs widely from the primitive Church about it, 
in the case of non-essentials; but then he differs little 
less from himself too; for all kind of imposers in that 
case are schismatics of the highest nature with him; he 
taxes them with cruelty, tyranny, violation of the Church's 
concord, and a great deal more, beyond his usual temper; 
and yet in his own account of the discipline of the primi- 
tive Church, he shews us there was as much imposition 
of that nature practised then, as he can any where com- 
plain of, in any orthodox Church at this very day. For 
his account of primitive provincial Synods is this, * 
They were assembled, says he, amongst other things, for 
resolving all difficult points that did not wound the essen- 
tials of religion, and what were those resolutions, but so 
many determinations one way or the other, what the 
Churches of the provinces they belonged to should be- 
lieve, in such non-essential matters as they so considered 
and resolved? especially, since he farther adds, f that 
what they there enacted, they decreed to be observed by all 
the faithful of those Churches whom they represented, or 
by all the members of them. Now this right of debating 
non-essential points in Ecclesiastical councils, of resolv- 
ing and determining about them there, and requiring all 
the Churches they belonged to, to acquiesce in such sy- 
nodical determinations of them, is all the imposition, I 
am sensible of, that any Orthodox Church, primitive or 
modern, can be charged with in any difficidt points that 
wound not the essentials of religion; and therefore I can- 
not see, I confess, what sort of imposers he can be so 

* Enq. p. 147 . 

T Enq. p. 148, and 14.9. 



WO AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

highly angry at in this case, without reflecting on the 
sacred Synods of the primitive Church, in his own man- 
ifest account of them, 

But it is too visible, with what partiality to his own 
opinion he * applies the venerable Irenseus' censure, of 
all inexcusable schismatics in his time, to the single per- 
sons of such imposers only, as he is pleased to call them; 
that is, to all Ecclesiastical authority whatsoever, which 
should determine any thing in these difficult points, which 
no way wound the essentials of religion, let their consid- 
erations of unity, peace, or order, in it, be what they 
will; and notwithstanding the right and practice he 
had owned, you see, before in primitive provincial Synods 
to do so. And that St. Cyprian and his African pro- 
vince drew up a solemn decree in such a case, as our 
learned author himself allows the case to be, for the ob- 
servation of all helonging to them, I have shewn at large 
before. 

But I shall leave Irenseus' own words with the reader, 
that he may judge how the bias of an author's mind must 
be set, to apply such general language to any special 
sense he has first prepared for it, which the holy father 
himself gives no manner of occasion for. The wo'rds 
$re these : 

The f spiritual man, says he, will jndge, or discern 
those who make schisms, who are inhuman, not having the 

*Enq.p. 158. 

t Discipulus vere spiritualis recipiens spiritum Dei — >— judicabit eos 
qui schismata operantur, qui sunt immanes, non habentes Dei dilec- 
tiooem, suamq : utilitatem potius considerantes, quara unitatem Ec- 
ctesise, propter modicas et quassibet causas magnum et gloriosum cor- 
pus Christi conscindunt et dividunt, et, quantum in ipsis est, interfici- 
wit; pacem loquentes, et bellum operantes, vere liquantes culicem, et 
cmmelurn transglutientes. Iren . 1. 4 . cap . 53, and 62. 



TH3 PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. 301 

love of Godn but 'preferring their own advantage before 
the unity of the Church, for trivial and slight causes, rend 
and divide the great and glorious body of Christ, and as 
much as in them lies, destroy it; who speak peace, but 
wage war, truly straining at a gnat, and swallowing a 
camel. 

Here is a fearful character of schismatics, every one 
sees; but the Enquirer thinks he sees more; he discerns 
a special kind of schismatics marked out here, to whom 
he frankly applies it all; and those are imposers of non- 
essentials, as I hinted but now, be their authority what it 
will, or the articles they decree never so innocent or use- 
ful in their kind. In such cases, all inferior members of 
a Church, by his construction of the place, may be left 
at liberty to disturb the peace, and rend the unity of the 
Church for such mere non-essential points, and be all the 
while innocent and blameless in it; for the whole guilt is 
removed, * you see, from them, and placed where it can- 
not touch them. But, what one syllable is there in Ire- 
nes' words, which looks that way? unless we will be 
great imposers ourselves, and oblige the reader to believe, 
that there could be no inhumanity, or want of the love of 
God in it, if any subordinate members of a Church should 
break the unity, and disobey their spiritual superiors too, 
for such slight matters as Irenseus speaks of there; or 
that it could not be said of them, that they preferred 
their own advantage before the Churches unity, who from 
being subjects in it, make themselves heads and govern- 
ors of faction and a party, by excepting against non- 
essential matters, and forming a schism upon it; or that 
it could not be supposed, that such mean and ordinary 
schismatics should make professions of peace and "piety } 

* E*j* p. 158. 

26* 



802 AN ORIGINAL DKAUGHT OF 

whilst they wage war against the Church qfi God. Or 
lastly, that to strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel, could 
with no propriety of speech be said of them, with whom 
a harmless non-essential will not down, and yet the dread* 
fill guilt of schism be easily digested by them. 

The words make no distinction of persons from one 
end to the other; nor exempt any from the common guilt 
of the same unnatural schism, where the cause of contro* 
versy and division is the same; that is for slight or non* 
essential matters; and it is strange to think the venerable 
author of them, who held the highest station in the 
Church, should mean to clear all other members of it, 
and leave them free to rend the great and glorious body 
of Christ, for such slender matters as he was speaking of. 
except himself alone, or such as he was* 

Had his first words been fairly translated, there could 
have been no umbrage for such a construction; for the 
schismatics Irengeus censures, are, in his own express 
ferms, such as * actually make or form a schism, upon 
some slender occasion or other, and not such as should 
more remotely cause, or occasion, such a schism to be 
made ? as the Enquirer has rendered them; and by that 
slight turn alone, made them so plausibly countenance 
his own peculiar application. 

But I will leave the quotation now to speak for itself*, 
and only excuse myself for differing in one particular 
more from the learned Enquirer, in translating that first 
sentence of it, He renders it thus, Thai at the last da.y> 
Christ shall judge those who cause the schisms, there spo« 
Hen of; and I doubt not, but all such schismatics will 
sadly find it so, But Irenseus* sense, I conceive to be 
this, that the spiritual man will judge } or discern, thoso 

* Qui schisraata- operantur, ; 



THE PBIMITIVE CHURCH, &C. ";.£'?$;' 303 

who actually make such schisms, &c. And my reason for it, 
is, because the holy father for niae or ten short chapters to- 
gether, was speaking in one continued discourse of this 
particular judge, who should try and discern all sorts of 
adversaries to the truth. And in the fifty-third chap- 
ter, where he first began it, he expresses by name the 
spiritual disciple, who should so discern and judge all y 
and himself be judged of no man, according to the sacred 
test, 1 Cor. ii. 15. And answerable to that, in the sixty 
second chapter, where he speaks of judging schismatics 
amongst the rest, in the words of this quotation before 
us, he shuts up the whole discourse with repeating that 
clause again, huh he himself will be judged or discerned 
by no man: which made it plain to me, that the spiritual 
man was the judge spoken of, from one end to the other; 
and therefore I translated it so. 

Some little attention then seems to have been wanting 
here, both as to the context and application of this prim- 
itive father's words. But take them in what sense we 
will, they are an evident instance of that awful sense 
which the first and best of Christians had of the dreadful 
sin of schism; not much unlike what the learned Enqui- 
rer has * observed from St. Cyprian to the same purpose; 
and since his Enquiry was professedly written to heal 
such unhappy divisions in the Church, and my heart tells 
me I had no other ends in all my observations upon it, I 
shall leave the authorities of both those ancient fathers 
to the serious consideration of the sons of peace, as no 
unsuitable conclusion to this whole discourse, 

St. Cyprian's words are very close and affecting in- 
deed. The schismatic, says he, f can no longer have God 

*Enq.p. 180. 

t Alienus esc — !- habere jam non potest Deura pattern, qui Eccle- 



304 AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT OF 

for his Father, who has not the Church for his mother, 
but is out of the number of the faithful; and though he 
should die for the faith, yet should he never be saved. 

And Irenseus' sense is this, that schism is such * a 
rending and dividing of the great and glorious body of 
Christ , as equals the guilt of schismatics to that of apos- 
tates from the faith, censured by St. Paul, -\uoho crucify to 
themselves afresh the Lord of Glory, and put him to an 
open shame; and this guilt he makes more monstrous and 
unnatural still, when men actually form their schism for 
t dight and inconsiderate matters; that is, as the learned 
Enquirer explains it, upon account of non-essential points, 
which wound no fundamental article of Christian faith or 
doctrine. To this sort of schismatics his censure more im- 
mediately belongs. And if the joint suffrage of these 
two eminent martyrs of the primitive Church were duly 
weighed and solemnly attended to, it might have a com- 
fortable influence upon the unhappy divisions of our 
times. For should all divided parties in the reformed 
Churches of this age, have the same awful fear of the 
dreadful guilt and danger of schism, and the same peace- 
ful indifference to non-essential points, as it is manifest 
these holy fathers of the primitive Church had; the sorest 
divisions amongst us would well nigh heal of themselves; 
we should need no litigious volumes of controversy to 
apply to them, which rather fret, than cure; they would 
insensibly dissolve within every man's own breast, through 
the gentle, but powerful influence of that spirit of peace, 

siara non habet matrem, tales etiamsi occisi in confessione nominis fuo- 
rint, macula ista nee sanguine abluitur. De Unit. 

* Magnum et gloriosum corpus Christi conscindu et dividunt, et 
quantum in ipsis est, interficiunt. Ire. ubi supra. 

f Heb. vi. 6. 

J Propter modicas et qaassibet causas, Iren. ut supra. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, &C 305 

humility, and love, which, for so many ages together, 
kept the universal Church of Christ in so amiable and 
admired an unity within itself. May the dying petition 
of the great Lord and Redeemer of the Church, so often 
and so affectionately * repeated to the Father, for the 
peace and unity of us all, procure that miracle of mercy 
for us, that we all may be one, even as the Father and he 
are one. Amen, Amen. 

*Jo. xvii. 11,21,22,23. 

FINIS. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: April 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

111 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



